|
| quote: | Originally posted by DeleteFromUsers
It sounds like you haven't worked in manufacturing or construction.
You are perhaps on the mark as far as white-collar jobs go. In blue-collar jobs, overtime is considered a benefit and workers get upset if you reduce/eliminate it. A lack of overtime is considered by management to be an indication of excessive staff or that the shop is running under capacity.
Morally it doesn't sound good, but idealism and realism rarely converge in these matters.
Assuming your workers are capable of maintaining productivity despite long hours, hiring one extra full time employee (with benefits) is *much* more expensive and *much* less flexible than having two current full time employees do 15-20 hours of OT.
I could rattle on for quite some time about why OT works in manufacturing, but the point is that OT is not *considered* to be disrespectful or irresponsible in many industries. |
You are right, I haven't worked in manufacturing, and this does make sense.
If it's repetitive work and relatively consistent conditions within the day, then workers should be able to maintain a reasonable level of productivity with 15-20 hours of overtime (although I'd argue that 25 hours or more is still excessive).
Also, if the workload is volatile (you don't know when you'll get an order, or for how much), and it's difficult to find part time or contract work, then a little overtime is better than another full-time employee.
It's not in every industry, though - including blue-collar industries - that it's even possible to distribute work in this way, let alone advantageous. I wouldn't exactly call driving a bus white-collar, but it involves hundreds of decisions, constantly changing conditions, totally consistent workload (routes are already set), and part-time workers are not difficult to find. Anything more than a few hours overtime, i.e. to cover a route for the guy who had to pick up his kids early from school, is completely illogical.
Even when dealing with skilled trades, as in electrical or plumbing or construction work (and our company employs all of those), the preferred approach is generally to use contractors. Works for us, since we don't have to pay people to do nothing in slow months, and works for them, because there are always other contracts during those months and they get lots of work from us when things do pick up. And yes, they are probably putting in some overtime when things do get hectic, but it's once in a while, not week after week.
I think your example is totally correct; it doesn't represent the general case however. I think there should be limits on overtime pay, at least in the public sector, and as with many other aspects of our employment standards, some industries would be exempt if they could justify what they're doing.
___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here
|