|
Law steals overtime pay from Americans
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DaveSZ |
http://www.freep.com/voices/columni...19_20040819.htm
COMMENT: Law steals overtime pay from Americans
August 19, 2004
BY ROSS EISENBREY
On Monday, the Bush administration will take away the right to receive overtime pay from millions of employees in a broad range of occupations, from office workers in financial services to embalmers, nursery school teachers and restaurant chefs and assistant managers. Despite four disapproving votes in Congress, the Bush administration is using its power and authority to accomplish the biggest rollback in employee rights in more than half a century.
The administration denies it is weakening overtime rights and claims to be taking overtime pay from workers earning $100,000 a year or more. But the new regulations have their biggest impact on employees earning far less. Salaried employees earning as little as $24,000 a year are subject to the new rules, which make it far easier for employers to deny overtime pay.
It might shock people to think the government would lie to them, but there is no nice way to describe the administration's campaign of disinformation around the new overtime regulations.
Secretary Elaine Chao's spin -- that she is only interested in clarity and helping low-wage workers -- is belied by the regulations themselves. According to three top experts on the Fair Labor Standards, virtually every change in the new regulations will weaken or eliminate the right to overtime pay. These nonpartisan experts, first appointed in the Reagan administration, include the Department's top two Fair Labor Standards lawyers for most of the last 20 years and the top career official responsible for enforcing the law during that same period. They also conclude the new regulations are so confusing and self-contradictory that they will provoke additional court litigation.
Looking only at 10 of the dozens of changes in the law, six million employees will lose the right to overtime pay. Those hit hardest will be low-level supervisors, who will be classified as executives by the new rules, even if they spend 90 percent of their time doing the same kind of labor as the two employees they supervise. Team leaders in factories, construction and office settings will lose overtime rights, and hundreds of thousands of employees without a college education will be called professionals and denied overtime pay.
This is a corruption of the Fair Labor Standards Act and its exemptions, by which Congress intended to ensure that all but a narrow class of well-paid top officials and professional employees would get time-and-a-half pay when they work long hours.
The Bush administration has sided with employer groups, who oppose regulation and resent having to pay extra for overtime work. They want the flexibility to work employees 50 or 60 hours a week without paying any more than they would for 40. One restaurant chain worked low-paid assistant managers 85 or 90 hours a week without any additional pay. The new rules will make that kind of abuse legal.
As we approach Labor Day, founded as part of the original campaign for an 8-hour workday and a 40-hour work week, it is critical to speak out against these new regulations. Unless Congress can block these regulations this fall, millions will lose overtime pay and find themselves working longer hours. It took 100 years of struggle to pass the Fair Labor Standards Act and create a 40-hour work week. It has taken the Bush administration less than four years to turn back the clock.
ROSS EISENBREY is vice president and policy director of the Economic Policy Institute, a nonprofit and nonpartisan think tank in Washington, D.C. Write to him at Economic Policy Institute, 1660 L Street NW, Suite 1200, Washington, D.C. 20036. |
|
|
| JM |
dont individual states have the right to say about overtime pay, as well as minimum wage?
>JM< |
|
|
| Q5echo |
in my opinion its been needing a change since the current labor laws covering guaranteed overtime salary cap haven't been changed in 30 yrs. the new law raises the cap from $8600 to $23,000. good.
now from what i understand is that if you make more than $23,000 but less than $100,000 in specific white collar fields your rights for overtime are still protected however it becomes your employers responsibility to claim your qualifying status as described under the new law. there is the rub. the only thing stopping said employer from changing your status to protect his bottom line and profits is a federal labor audit and his integrity. in other words, as a worker you must trust the employer not to change your status.
if i'm not correct about this please do something. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
in my opinion its been needing a change since the current labor laws covering guaranteed overtime salary cap haven't been changed in 30 yrs. the new law raises the cap from $8600 to $23,000. good.
now from what i understand is that if you make more than $23,000 but less than $100,000 in specific white collar fields your rights for overtime are still protected however it becomes your employers responsibility to claim your qualifying status as described under the new law. there is the rub. the only thing stopping said employer from changing your status to protect his bottom line and profits is a federal labor audit and his integrity. in other words, as a worker you must trust the employer not to change your status.
if i'm not correct about this please do something. |
I agree this law needed change, and that it certainly is a good thing for those making under 23K, however I think categorizing anything above 23K as a "white collar" job is grossly overstated. Regardless of that minor semantics point, I think the overall effects will not be seen for awhile.
But what disturbs me the most are the numbers of who gains overtime vs. who loses overtime. Factcheck.org took MoveOn.org's numbers to task awhile ago, indicating that it inflated the figures to 8 million workers losing overtime:
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=151
Even if we went by factcheck's corrections, we're still talking about over 6 million workers losing overtime. Now granted, I'm not too terribly worried about those individuals who earn close to the 6 figure range, but it does concern me for the rest of those folks in the lower and mid-range (including myself). The numbers for those under 23K who will gain from this new policy, however, are at best 1.2 million. While I certainly think they should earn their overtime pay, I tend to wonder about the uneven tradeoff of those who stand to lose it. And if I was running a business, when it comes down to the bottom line I think any CEO or owner would likely cut overtime pay as needed. Granted, this may possibly hurt worker retention, but considering our country already works more hours than any other country, I really don't believe this will matter much in the long run.
Overall, this is a very pro-business move, which is why unions are screaming about it. I think they are correct for the most part, but what I fail to understand is why there has to be such an uneven tradeoff. As to the effects to the economy, time will tell. I personally feel we can do better than to have to cut the overtime pay for millions of workers, thus screwing our already overworked employees in this country.
Incidently, here's another interesting downside to the new rule:
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/ml...ess/9468137.htm
Though it's somewhat a good thing that corrections must be made, I tend to wonder if any actually WILL be made. Business audits and IRS corrections have progressively slacked over the years. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by DaveSZ
Despite four disapproving votes in Congress, the Bush administration is using its power and authority to accomplish the biggest rollback in employee rights in more than half a century. |
4 whole disapproving votes?!?! OMG! The administration is really strong-arming congress on this one, eh?:wtf: |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
4 whole disapproving votes?!?! OMG! The administration is really strong-arming congress on this one, eh?:wtf: |
LOL!!
Good one, I didn't even catch it on first glance.
Don't leave Shaka.. we need you:(
:p |
|
|
| Yoepus |
Anyhoo.
I don't know what you guys are complaining about. The overtime laws sound fair to me:
| quote: |
New overtime rules
Highlights of the Labor Department's new overtime regulations taking effect today
Originally published August 23, 2004
source: http://rdr.sbml.cc/Click?q=8e-Ve8cQ...iQPDF8PkVwtWsRR
Baltimore Sun
# Workers earning $23,660 annually or less are eligible for overtime pay for working more than 40 hours a week. The department says about 1.3 million workers will be newly eligible.
# White-collar workers earning $100,000 or more a year are newly exempt from overtime pay.
advertisement
advertisement
# Changes to duties that determine whether an employee is a professional, executive or administrative and exempt from overtime will result in "very few, if any" workers losing overtime. Critics disagree, saying 6 million could lose overtime.
# Union workers covered by contracts will not be affected by the change.
# People identified as generally exempt from overtime pay include pharmacists, funeral directors, embalmers, journalists, financial services industry workers, insurance claims adjusters, human resource managers, management consultants, executive and administrative assistants, purchasing agents, registered or certified medical technologists, dental hygienists, physician's assistants, accountants, chefs, athletic trainers with degrees or specialized training, computer systems analysts, programmers and software engineers.
# Department officials say employers should determine eligibility for overtime pay on a case-by-case basis.
# To contact the Department of Labor or check online for more information on the new overtime rules, go to www.dol.gov/fairpay or call 1-866-4-US-WAGE.
- Staff and wire reports |
|
|
|
|
|
