HR 1119 and S 317

[Matt249SAW]

all,

I have recently learned some disturbing news. Now, I know most of you work a good paying job. Probably , most work for hourly wages. I normally don't like putting this type of Information on this type of board but I really couldn't think of another board more suitable for the mass mailings that is needed.

To break it down:

I recieved a letter from a Union meeting (yes I said Union meeting) concerning the formentioned bills. The Information seemed a little one sided so I checked it out for myself. It seems to hold true. Read for yourself:

On March 31st, 2003, the Bush administration proposed new rules that would take away the right to overtime pay for millions of workers, in addition to eroding the 40-hour workweek.(Federal Registry, Vol. 68, No 61, 3/31/03

Lobbying groups are pushing Congress to pass the bill that would replace overtime pay with Comp time. (www.Thomas.loc.gov, 4/2/03)

Employers would have the option to decide who gets comp time and when they can take it.(Economic Policy Institute Issue Brief)

Now my first reaction was "come on.... just another leftist plot using the unions to get the information out."

I'm here to tell you now that I have verified this through other sites. Now If I lead you to some site I could be thought of as a puppet for these leftist's, so I'll let you fint out for yourself. quite the eye opener huh?

Matt

 

[Pendragon]

I have not read the overtime bill in question but loosening up the overtime laws is probably a good thing.

The original law was intended to disuade factories from over working people and to encourage them to hire more people instead.

It is an industrial era law that does not work well in our current economy. Many states have different laws that often are more restrictive than the federal law, but in general:

The 40 hour, M-F 8-5 schedule is completely unnecessary for a lot of people in our economy. It was originally implemented because everyone had to be at the factory for things to run.

These days, a lot of people can work asynchronously from their fellow employees yet the overtime laws pressure people and companies to try to maintain a 5X8hr schedule.

A lot of people and companies would work just fine with 4x10 or even 3x13.3 or even 80 hours one week and zero hours the next.

I am not a huge fan of overtime laws, but I understand the social engineering behind them - so if we are going to have them, we should at least modify them to work in our newer economy.

Of course, this may impact people who still work in old economy jobs, but then, when you social engineer, some get the good, some get the bad and who's to say who gets what?

 

[Matt249SAW]

So what you are saying is people who work 50 hour weeks that get paid hourly should not recieve conpensation?

most of the time the 40 hour work week prevents an employer from forcing people into a "you will work 60 hours a week or hit the road" situation. I enjoy time with my family. I enjoy knowing that at the end of the week I can watch my kid play baseball, or go shooting his 22. why would you want to creat a situation that exhisted as you described again?

Matt

 

[Pendragon]

If I work in product development, there may be times when I need to be in crunch mode and work 80 hours in a week.

There may be slow times when I am only needed 10 or 20 hours in a week.

I think that many overtime laws are too restrictive in that they incentivise employers to make people work 40 hours per week and not much more.

Why not just have the OT tied to a 30 day average? So you work 60 hours one week, 20 the next and it averages 40 hours per week, so no OT.

I think you are looking at this situation only on the basis of what is good for you and your job. OT laws hamper flexibility and productivity in an economy that is no longer mostly about cranking out products on an assembly line - an environment where the 40 hour week makes the most sense.

I have had jobs in the past that have told me - they would love to have me work 4 days a week, 10 hours a day, but the OT laws made it too much of a hassle. Sure maybe the law works good for you, but it did not work well for me.

Such is the case when we use the law for social engineering. Some get benefits, some get the hose.

Freedom does not discriminate like that.


edit: oh - and I was not saying that people who work 50 hours should not be paid for 50 hours.

But if you work 50 hours, why should you be paid as if you worked 55?

 

[David Park]

Overtime pay? What's that? I would be happy to even get comp time, but as a salaried employee at a start-up company, I (and most everybody else) have to work 10-12 hour days, sometimes six days a week, just to keep the company afloat. I don't see this as "unfair", I see it as an opportunity to help build a business that will hopefully provide great rewards in the future.

I think Pendragon's right on target.

 

[Sergeant Bob]

I do believe Sat. and Sun. are considered overtime days correct? Well, you can probably say goodbye to weekends with the family. Without overtime laws these companies are going to be able to have weekend coverage which was cost prohibitive before, and you can bet they are going to do it. The unions will probably be safe for a while, at least till their current contracts expire.

This Act may be cited as the `Family Time Flexibility Act'.

Cute title, sounds so nice. Read the bill, the employee is going to lose . By the way, I'm a non union truck driver, which means the government has waivered the requirement for overtime pay, so I have no personal stake in this.

Here's a link that works