Author Topic:  (Read 1690 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gazoo

  • Inactive Members
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,968
« on: March 12, 2014, 11:20:09 AM »
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 11:23:23 AM by Gazoo »
"The Tea Party has a right to feel cheated.

When does the Republican Party, put in the majority by the Tea Party, plan to honor its commitment to halt the growth of the Federal monolith and bring the budget back into balance"?

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2014, 11:26:55 AM »

Offline Gazoo

  • Inactive Members
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,968
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2014, 11:38:59 AM »
Obama to order expansion of overtime pay for millions of workers

From the article:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/12/obama-to-reportedly-order-expansion-overtime-pay-for-millions-workers/

It's called hyperinflation. Why do I have a feeling that Obama wants to crash our economy and will probably write an E.O. to suspend 2014 elections until the madness is done. Then he can work on registering more dead bodies to vote for democrats.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 11:39:17 AM by Gazoo »
"The Tea Party has a right to feel cheated.

When does the Republican Party, put in the majority by the Tea Party, plan to honor its commitment to halt the growth of the Federal monolith and bring the budget back into balance"?

Offline Gazoo

  • Inactive Members
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,968
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2014, 04:53:00 AM »
And so it begins...

Tim Ryan: '$13 To $14 An Hour' For Minimum Wage 'Would Be Livable'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/12/tim-ryan-minimum-wage_n_4948675.html?&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016
"The Tea Party has a right to feel cheated.

When does the Republican Party, put in the majority by the Tea Party, plan to honor its commitment to halt the growth of the Federal monolith and bring the budget back into balance"?

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,422
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2014, 08:57:42 AM »
It's past time for business to take this enemy on and just say "NO!". 
"January 20th 2017 will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again."  --  President Donald J. Trump

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 34,180
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2014, 09:19:26 AM »
This is not about minimum wage.  It's about salaried workers who are working a helluva lot more than 40 hours per week without compensation.

We all know human nature.....and any employer worth his/her salt would pour more and more responsibility and duties on the existing staff before you take on a new employee with bennies.

Well.....that strategy has ended up with people working 50-60 plus hours each week.

Time and one-half per hour would get their attention.

My friend recently switched jobs from a non-profit housing group to property management.  She wasn't told that HOA meetings which she must attend would be sometimes 2-3 times each week.  Those meetings usually start at 6:30 or 7PM and last a couple of hours before she can even begin her drive home.  Sometimes it's an hour drive to get to the communities she services.

In normal times, she'd quit the job and find something else.  In this climate....not going to happen.
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

 I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades.

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2014, 09:30:37 AM »
Quote
This is not about minimum wage.  It's about salaried workers who are working a helluva lot more than 40 hours per week without compensation.

Most employees know this when they take on a job. One of my sons is on salary, and sometimes puts in long hours. It's grueling, especially since his kids are in sports. His labor didn't go unnoticed because he got bonuses at the end of the year, in lieu of raises. I suppose, that if companies are forced to pay more, then the bonuses will cease.

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 34,180
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2014, 09:34:37 AM »
Most employees know this when they take on a job. One of my sons is on salary, and sometimes puts in long hours. It's grueling, especially since his kids are in sports. His labor didn't go unnoticed because he got bonuses at the end of the year, in lieu of raises. I suppose, that if companies are forced to pay more, then the bonuses will cease.

..which is certainly better, IMO.


....cause you cannot tell your creditors to "wait until I get my year end bonus".
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

 I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades.

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2014, 09:41:07 AM »
..which is certainly better, IMO.


....cause you cannot tell your creditors to "wait until I get my year end bonus".

An employee signs on for a given salary, and the bonus is just that, a bonus. If they are a lousy employee, I doubt they get a bonus. It has nothing to do with creditors, unless an employee considers a bonus their given salary.

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 49,960
  • TBR Illuminati
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2014, 09:45:42 AM »
This is not about minimum wage.  It's about salaried workers who are working a helluva lot more than 40 hours per week without compensation.

We all know human nature.....and any employer worth his/her salt would pour more and more responsibility and duties on the existing staff before you take on a new employee with bennies.

Well.....that strategy has ended up with people working 50-60 plus hours each week.

Time and one-half per hour would get their attention.

My friend recently switched jobs from a non-profit housing group to property management.  She wasn't told that HOA meetings which she must attend would be sometimes 2-3 times each week.  Those meetings usually start at 6:30 or 7PM and last a couple of hours before she can even begin her drive home.  Sometimes it's an hour drive to get to the communities she services.

In normal times, she'd quit the job and find something else.  In this climate....not going to happen.

we all have our crosses to bear; your friend's situation is unfortunate, but that hardly justifies using the unopposable force of government to tip the scales.

furthermore, your friend may simply end up losing her job under these new regulations, at which point she'll be forced to try and find that new job she doesn't think is out there, or take something even worse; her income also won't go up, it'll go down.

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,967
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2014, 10:02:43 AM »
we all have our crosses to bear; your friend's situation is unfortunate, but that hardly justifies using the unopposable force of government to tip the scales.

furthermore, your friend may simply end up losing her job under these new regulations, at which point she'll be forced to try and find that new job she doesn't think is out there, or take something even worse; her income also won't go up, it'll go down.

Government does have some usefulness. This, in my opinion, is a valid use of government.
Good employers resent the intrusion. Good employers compensate and adjust so they don't burn out their employees. Good employers actually have some concern for their employees.

Not all employers are good.

In the case of a salaried employee in a stagnant economy, some employers stress their employees beyond reason. And they don't really care if they have to replace "weak links". Some salaried employees are required to be on the job at least 40 hours, and work much more, with compensation time being heavily discouraged. Those that would comp, are weak links.
 

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 34,180
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2014, 10:05:33 AM »
An employee signs on for a given salary, and the bonus is just that, a bonus. If they are a lousy employee, I doubt they get a bonus. It has nothing to do with creditors, unless an employee considers a bonus their given salary.

Not my point.....you inferred that a year end bonus would eventually compensate the employee for all the overtime hours.

Doesn't help the employee when they are struggling to meet their basic monthly bills during the year.
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

 I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades.

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 49,960
  • TBR Illuminati
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2014, 10:11:25 AM »
Government does have some usefulness. This, in my opinion, is a valid use of government.
Good employers resent the intrusion. Good employers compensate and adjust so they don't burn out their employees. Good employers actually have some concern for their employees.

Not all employers are good.

In the case of a salaried employee in a stagnant economy, some employers stress their employees beyond reason. And they don't really care if they have to replace "weak links". Some salaried employees are required to be on the job at least 40 hours, and work much more, with compensation time being heavily discouraged. Those that would comp, are weak links.
 

I disagree completely.  Most companies do something that some portion of Americans don't like; does that mean that we should have the government effectively take over the management of every company?

If an employee absolutely cannot deal with the pressure then that employee should find an alternate line of work.  Been there, done that.  It wasn't fun financially but in the end it was worth it.

The counter-argument essentially justifies Obamacare in all of its "glory" because some people have to suck it up and stay at jobs they don't like in order to keep their health insurance - or so the democrat argument goes - and therefore to free those people up to find better work government has to step in to make health insurance affordable enough that people can afford to leave those oppressive jobs.

It's a very nice idea - the intent is very noble - but as we're seeing even now, the consequences are devastating.  If people are going to lose jobs, or have their hours cut, because of Obamacare, which imposes less direct per-employee costs on employers, then people will definitely lose jobs and/or have their hours cut when employers are faced with this much more direct government-imposed cost.

As the saying goes, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2014, 10:11:52 AM by Oceander »

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,967
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2014, 10:43:46 AM »
I disagree completely.  Most companies do something that some portion of Americans don't like; does that mean that we should have the government effectively take over the management of every company?

Rather than stay on point, you take extremes. So, is this where I should bring up the Battle of Blair Mountain?

Employers have the upper hand. Without sufficient protection, employers will abuse employees. History is filled with examples. Third world countries provide numerous examples today.

So yes, we strongly disagree.

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,691
« Reply #14 on: March 13, 2014, 11:33:07 AM »
Rather than stay on point, you take extremes. So, is this where I should bring up the Battle of Blair Mountain?

Employers have the upper hand. Without sufficient protection, employers will abuse employees. History is filled with examples. Third world countries provide numerous examples today.

So yes, we strongly disagree.

The result of this directive will be the limitation of overtime for these exempt employees, thus forcing the employer to hire more people.  While some may think this is a good thing, that money has to come from somewhere, and it will come out of the raises, bonuses and starting salaries of everybody else.

Companies exist to make profit for shareholders, not to hire more workers.  In addition, this is a thinly veiled attempt by the Obama administration to push more small businesses toward that 50 employee threshold, thus forcing them to provide insurance or pay a fine.  Where is that money going to come from?

More wage stagnation is in our future.
Roy Moore's "spiritual warfare" is driving past a junior high without stopping.

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 264,034
« Reply #15 on: March 13, 2014, 12:01:48 PM »

Support the USO

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 49,960
  • TBR Illuminati
« Reply #16 on: March 13, 2014, 12:33:33 PM »
Rather than stay on point, you take extremes. So, is this where I should bring up the Battle of Blair Mountain?

Employers have the upper hand. Without sufficient protection, employers will abuse employees. History is filled with examples. Third world countries provide numerous examples today.

So yes, we strongly disagree.

Define "sufficient protection."

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
« Reply #17 on: March 13, 2014, 12:58:36 PM »
Define "sufficient protection."

The wool mills in Lancashire and Yorkshire. The ironstone and coal mines in the North of England. The steel works stretching from Sheffield to Middlesboro. The chemical plants dotted around the country. The match makers, where phossie jaw was an inevitable condition. Triangle Shirtwaist, if you want an American one.
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 49,960
  • TBR Illuminati
« Reply #18 on: March 13, 2014, 09:08:38 PM »
The wool mills in Lancashire and Yorkshire. The ironstone and coal mines in the North of England. The steel works stretching from Sheffield to Middlesboro. The chemical plants dotted around the country. The match makers, where phossie jaw was an inevitable condition. Triangle Shirtwaist, if you want an American one.

Ahh, so turning middle management - and higher in some cases - into hourly employees entitled to time and a half after 40 a week will protect them from a Triangle Shirtwaist incident?

I've never said there was no role for government to play - if there weren't, then we'd never have got government in the first place - but it's asking too much to say that "adequate protection" requires that government dictate everyone's pay packet.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
« Reply #19 on: March 13, 2014, 09:37:31 PM »
I'm actually fairly stunned by this. I was an exempt employee - I worked so many never compensated OT hours that is sometimes made me envy the hourly employees........ 

BTW they won't hire more people to compensate.... I worked for a Fortune 500 long enough (28 years) to know that isn't going to happen.

Online Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 49,960
  • TBR Illuminati
« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2014, 09:39:21 PM »
I'm actually fairly stunned by this. I was an exempt employee - I worked so many never compensated OT hours that is sometimes made me envy the hourly employees........ 

BTW they won't hire more people to compensate.... I worked for a Fortune 500 long enough (28 years) to know that isn't going to happen.

perhaps not, but what they will do is raise the level of productivity expected for a given 40-hour week.  In other words, what used to take you 50 hours to do will now have to get done in 40 hours or less, or else you'll find yourself replaced.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
« Reply #21 on: March 13, 2014, 09:42:32 PM »
perhaps not, but what they will do is raise the level of productivity expected for a given 40-hour week.  In other words, what used to take you 50 hours to do will now have to get done in 40 hours or less, or else you'll find yourself replaced.

Yes, but the alternative O is not taking into consideration will be more outsourcing to India or Indonesia.   A couple of weeks ago I had to call DISH.. the prior calls always went to somewhere in the USA -Ohio, etc... this guy spoke such perfect English I was shocked when he told me he was in Indonesia.

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,422
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2014, 10:18:46 AM »
BTW they won't hire more people to compensate.... I worked for a Fortune 500 long enough (28 years) to know that isn't going to happen.

If they do it will be temporary and/or part-time employees.
"January 20th 2017 will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again."  --  President Donald J. Trump

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2014, 10:29:39 AM »
Quote
perhaps not, but what they will do is raise the level of productivity expected for a given 40-hour week.  In other words, what used to take you 50 hours to do will now have to get done in 40 hours or less, or else you'll find yourself replaced.

The level of productivity might go up, but if companies refuse overtime, many of the employees will work off the clock to make up for lost production. I had a job, that on certain days, I had to stay over to finish. I would clock out, then get back to work. I was far from being alone.


Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2014, 11:42:41 AM »
The level of productivity might go up, but if companies refuse overtime, many of the employees will work off the clock to make up for lost production. I had a job, that on certain days, I had to stay over to finish. I would clock out, then get back to work. I was far from being alone.

In our business we have one fixed rule. A 40 hour work week for all five employees, no overtime. If they want to spread that over 7 days, or do 20 hours on a Monday and 20 hours on a Wednesday, it's cool. Work 12 hours a day for an entire week to get a specific contract done? I better not see your face next week at all.
It works for us. We're a small shop, have worked together for years now, and people know what they need to do and are experienced enough to handle their own scheduling.

The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf