House Republicans Pass Bill to End Overtime Pay

So this thread tells me some people will fight against an option for employees to get more paid time off.... purely for ideological reasons.

Astonishing... increasing the range of choices that will be protected by law is under attack... I really do not know what to say.

Heck you can argue its a useless law since a large number of people no longer see OT anyways to protect the company from the ACA tax... that I could buy.

But saying this is a huge benefit for the companies and the companies alone is disingenuous at best, kind of reminds me of a former co-worker that always took OT pay over comp time. He could not understand why I always chose comp time... finally one day he asked me.. my answer... "I like my wife and enjoy spending time with her, if I can spend more time with her and get paid for it thats win win for me."

Lots of people like their family and would like the option of getting paid to spend more time with them.

Republicans NEVER do anything with the intent of helping the poor or middle class.

NOTHING!

Zero…zilch…
If one looked back in legislative history they’ll find ZIP bills from the republicans since…lets say 1980…where they passed or initiated any bill or new law that helped the small guy.

On the other hand, they’ll find any bill they have ever passed or supported does help the rich and powerful

Also, they will find bills and laws that attempt to diminish or take away things the poor or middle class now rely on to survive such as their present attempt to abolish Obamacare

Accepting a bill from the GOP that helps poor people is like a Jewish person accepting a favor from Nazis or a black person accepting something from a klansmen

originally posted by: Irishhaf
So this thread tells me some people will fight against an option for employees to get more paid time off.... purely for ideological reasons.

Astonishing... increasing the range of choices that will be protected by law is under attack... I really do not know what to say.

Heck you can argue its a useless law since a large number of people no longer see OT anyways to protect the company from the ACA tax... that I could buy.

But saying this is a huge benefit for the companies and the companies alone is disingenuous at best, kind of reminds me of a former co-worker that always took OT pay over comp time. He could not understand why I always chose comp time... finally one day he asked me.. my answer... "I like my wife and enjoy spending time with her, if I can spend more time with her and get paid for it thats win win for me."

Lots of people like their family and would like the option of getting paid to spend more time with them.

There's a better system to do this already though. Employee's can purchase extra vacation days from their employer. It's not uncommon, and it's of far more benefit to the employee to do things that way because they get the money up front, and can make more informed choices at a later date.

a reply to: CB328



If you are working at a job where you have to work a lot of overtime, its usually long hours and labor intensive. Not sure how people who are required to work extra hours will be able to use all that comp time when they have to consistently be there to work extra hours. But in a way, its good, they are going to make employment so undesirable that you will see an increase in people seeking self employment. I would love to see the day when they drive so many workers out of the workplace and into self employment there is a worker shortage and everyone tells them to go F themselves.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Irishhaf
So this thread tells me some people will fight against an option for employees to get more paid time off.... purely for ideological reasons.

Astonishing... increasing the range of choices that will be protected by law is under attack... I really do not know what to say.

Heck you can argue its a useless law since a large number of people no longer see OT anyways to protect the company from the ACA tax... that I could buy.

But saying this is a huge benefit for the companies and the companies alone is disingenuous at best, kind of reminds me of a former co-worker that always took OT pay over comp time. He could not understand why I always chose comp time... finally one day he asked me.. my answer... "I like my wife and enjoy spending time with her, if I can spend more time with her and get paid for it thats win win for me."

Lots of people like their family and would like the option of getting paid to spend more time with them.

There's a better system to do this already though. Employee's can purchase extra vacation days from their employer. It's not uncommon, and it's of far more benefit to the employee to do things that way because they get the money up front, and can make more informed choices at a later date.

Never actually heard of that... it read to me like they are trying to do what Federal employees can already do, I liked it... it was literally the same as how I gathered vacation time.

Okay I have been following this post closely and read the law and did find ONE downside which has been briefly discussed. That is with the employer. The employer who accepts this will naturally have the customary blackout periods which people cannot take PTO (for the sake of ease in this conversation PTO includes the compensation OT pay outlined in the bill). For companies which use a lot of OT with reliable employees instead of spending the money on: hiring, training, med. Ins., SSI, worker’s comp, vacation, sick leave, family medical leave, liability, etc. for a new employee. Not to mention turnover of new employees. Should they opt to adopt this, they will now have the reliable employees around -less- if the employees take the PTO. This will force them to hire another employee (which OT laws were supposed to incentivize) to cover the massive amount of PTO these employees will generate. This will eventually lead to employees working to cover for PTO to end up supplementing the job they should have had (which generated the OT in the first place) eventually removing the OT at all.

In example:

You work for a company and 3 employees average about 10 hours of OT a week, they start taking their 15 PTO hours off regularly now leaving the employer with 3 less people there at all. Employer hires another individual part time for the magical number of 29 hours a week (of course to avoid vacation, sick leave, OT, etc). The new employee will never approach the OT threshold of 40 hours a week. Soon the 10 hours of OT required from the 3 employees a week vanishes. Which will suck if they actually depended on it. Further this may incentivize employers to lay off FT employees and hire a slew of PT 24 hour a week employees for very much the same reason. This leaves many more PT positions with no health coverage in a rut seeing other employment because of (what I think most agree on) inflated health care costs.

Some may argue that the company should have had that fourth employee in the first place. But this does not negate that it may happen. Some people will NOT have the option to ‘look for work for a better company’. Some people will have their overtime shrunk.

When asking around almost everyone I know would jump at PTO in exchange for their overtime “You mean I’d get paid the same, and a day off? I could actually spend my money I earned?!” and were very pleased with the scenario.

That said, overall I think eliminating this regulation is a fantastic idea, and would benefit many employers and employees alike if managed properly! I really like it over-all.

One last question for those still lingering in this thread. In Nevada overtime laws are above/beyond federal OT laws. In Nevada if you earn under 1.5x the state minimum wage (12.37/hr) and work over 8 hours in a 24-hour period any hour worked over the 8th hour is overtime. Further, if you earn under 1.5x the state minimum wage (12.37/hr) and are scheduled a shift which begins within 12 hours of when your last shift ends, the entire shift is considered overtime (example: Working 5pm – 10pm, then the next morning at 8am, the entire 8am shift is considered overtime).

This law essentially then grants part time employees who are working overtime and not granted PTO from their company to accrue PTO. Which is nice, especially since many PT employees I have worked with are college students (could take a week off for finals) or working other PT jobs (could take a legitimate day off). But that is ONLY IF this federal mandate includes -all overtime pay- not just -overtime pay over 40 hours-. I am curious now to know if all OT is considered equal under this deregulation.

A friend of mine has had that option for years. He is allowed to bank up to 80 hours before it is mandatory for him to use them. So every few months he takes 2 weeks off and low and behold he still has a job to return to. He loves it and I am totally envious every time he tells me he is off for the next 2 weeks.

Overtime is great for some people if they dont value their freetime..... but I do. If someone can tell me where I can take my overtime money and bribe the grim reaper so that I can hang around and have some fun I would like to hear from ya.

Lot of you people have poor math skills though.
Overtime is 1.5x hourly rate...... so you get payed your hourly rate.... and bank 1/2 hour. It's not rocket science. You would have to work 80 hours of OT in order to take a week off. If you work 50 hours a week, it would take 2 months to accumulate 40hrs of PTO.

This would never fly in my trade. As a machinist who does work for the big3, deadlines are very serious business. If parts are late, machines dont get built or repaired and lines go down. When the big3 has a line down we are talking about millions of dollars per hour flying out the window and angry company reps looking to recoup their losses.
People in my trade would never be allowed to enjoy having a system in place that allows a week off here and there....but it's nice to dream

There are some good things about this legislation and there are some bad things. Just like there are companies who will use this legislation the way it is intended and there are companies that will use it to take advantage of their employees.

One thing to remember is that PTO time needs approval. You can't just call in and say it is PTO time. The company will approve or deny based on expected workload and available resources (employees). PTO will probably be granted on a seniority basis in most companies.

But there is an aspect to PTO time most people who don't have PTO time may not consider. If you work overtime and get paid for it you get that money no matter what. But, if you work overtime and get PTO you may never get it. Where my wife works there are people with over 450 hours of PTO banked right now. If they lost their job today that PTO is gone. Its not like vacation time. You do not get the cash equivalent for it when you leave the company. Different companies have different rules. And some of them will take advantage of their own employees every chance they get. I know. Been there - done that.

a reply to: EvillerBob
"Which is the entire point of the current proposal - it will allow businesses to offer it if they choose. Nobody is being compelled to offer it, and even if it is offered then nobody is being compelled to accept it. "

Then why the time and money spent to make a federal law?

a reply to: CB328

So get paid for hours VS get paid for hours......

1/3 of their extra value in pay or as days of rest at regular pay...nice deal.

My company just pays us all salary so they don't have to pay OT

So what happens to the people that are working a few extra hours at a standard job to pay off debt or pay off the bills? As of right now I know atleast 4 or 5 people who are in this position where those extra hours every week are very important in them being able to cover prior debts and all of their bills. They would rather be able to work 60 hours, and get paid for those 60 hours and be able to live somewhat comfortably then only get paid for a max of 40 hours, than have few days off and still only earn those 40 hours worth of pay. I suspect most companies would switch to the system of time off over paying overtime.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Never actually heard of that... it read to me like they are trying to do what Federal employees can already do, I liked it... it was literally the same as how I gathered vacation time.

www.nydailynews.com...

There's an article on it. It's a perk that's been gaining in popularity over the past few years. Not every company offers it, but it's generally rather popular in the ones that do.

originally posted by: trb71
So what happens to the people that are working a few extra hours at a standard job to pay off debt or pay off the bills? As of right now I know atleast 4 or 5 people who are in this position where those extra hours every week are very important in them being able to cover prior debts and all of their bills. They would rather be able to work 60 hours, and get paid for those 60 hours and be able to live somewhat comfortably then only get paid for a max of 40 hours, than have few days off and still only earn those 40 hours worth of pay. I suspect most companies would switch to the system of time off over paying overtime.

In theory, they should be able to take the OT pay rather than the PTO as compensation. The main concern people have is that even though there's legal protections here that say employee's can choose which they want to take, the employer has a certain level of control and power to effectively dictate what the employee takes.

a reply to: Zimnydran

This would never fly in my trade. As a machinist who does work for the big3, deadlines are very serious business.

Also a machinist who does work for ALL auto manufacturers, I would have to disagree. It could be a shop per shop basis but we would actually benefit being a smaller one. We go up and down throughout the year, same experience in the metal supply business from where I came, and having a level payroll and being able to allocate time for the day when we will surely slow down or one of our mills break.

A few times a year that happens. Either not enough work or some sort of maintenance. Being able to use some comp time instead of vacation or for the newer guys, nothing at all, would surely work to our benefit and they folks here are in agreement.

However, like I said, smaller shop. Just wanted to highlight that point.

originally posted by: Zimnydran
Lot of you people have poor math skills though.
Overtime is 1.5x hourly rate...... so you get payed your hourly rate.... and bank 1/2 hour. It's not rocket science. You would have to work 80 hours of OT in order to take a week off. If you work 50 hours a week, it would take 2 months to accumulate 40hrs of PTO.

Is that how it works if you take the time off? You're still getting the full amount? 1.0 now and then the 0.5 later on as vacation time?


The question of whether you are actually getting "paid vacation" is pretty much irrelevant. You could just as easily put the money you're making now into a bank account, and pay it back to yourself later on when you go on vacation.

Getting it now is usually better because you can invest it, or if you have debt you can pay down debt earlier instead of later.

But under some circumstances..... you might be better off waiting, because you don't have to report it as income until you actually receive it.

Oh!

Another possible reason to roll it over might be if you anticipate getting a raise later on. Depending how your employer handles paid vacation time, collecting the hours later might mean you get to collect them at a future, higher, hourly rate.

a reply to: JinMI "The only hangup I can see is if they are only giving one hour PTO vs the time and a half overtime pay."
So in the end it would be working straight time. Time and a half is the incentive to work over 40 hours as of now. This would give the Employee the extra time they spend past 40 hours and put it towards PTO that you normally would not be getting. Your not going to get time and a half in PTO. Cant work for one hour and earn an hour and a half in PTO. You would run into problems with staffing in small companies. Not enough people, And too many people with PTO. there would not be enough people to stand in and work while you and whoever else wants to take off that week away. (Gas stations, Shops, ect. ect.)

a reply to: PainGod

Since that comment, the bill has been sourced and it is not the case. 1.5 OT = 1.5 HRS PTO. Each shop is different however in my experience they all go through some sort of slow time or re-tooling etc. Being able to use comp time would smooth that out for many folks and they could still save their earned vacation time where applicable.

a reply to: CB328

I agree with everyone, you didn't read the article and I am not surprised. Nice try, though. I would live to have a choice of working my ass off getting paid or working my ass off and getting a vacation with pay. It's a no brainer. .