Bush Stiffs Workers on Overtime

[Sparx]

Bush Stiffs Workers on Overtime

While touting the economy this month, President Bush said, "A more productive
worker makes more money"
But if he has his way on new overtime regulations,
that will no longer be the case for tens of thousands of workers.

In a move designed to blur the issue, the Administration today said it was
revising its previous effort to terminate overtime protections for 8 million
workers. But even by the Bush Administration's own admission, the "new"
regulations will mean that tens of thousands of lower-income workers will be cutoff.
Opponents of the Administration's plan say that the revisions would still
cause problems for mean millions. The regulations are so bad for workers that
some state legislatures have even rushed through legislation to block them.

The new overtime regulations come just four months after AP reported that the
Bush Labor Department began "giving employers tips on how to avoid paying
overtime to some of the 1.3 million low-income workers"5. The Administration
specifically told employers they could "cut workers' hourly wages and add the
overtime to equal the original salary, or raise salaries to the new $22,100
annual threshold, making them ineligible." Labor Secretary Elaine Chao testified
before Congress that too many workers were filing "needless litigation" in
efforts to force employers to pay them back wages6. Her insult to workers belied
the fact that judges have ordered the government to "collect more than $212
million in back pay for workers" - the most in a decade and a strong signal that
the efforts to fight worker abuse are far from "needless."



Sources:


President Announces New Education Initiatives for Stronger Workforce,
04/06/2004.
"8 million may lose OT pay", CNN Money, 06/27/2003.
"Administration to Revise Overtime Plan", New York Times, 04/20/2004.
"Senate votes to preserve overtime pay", Associated Press, 04/16/2004.
"U.S. offers tips on avoiding overtime pay", MSNBC, 01/05/2004.
"More workers filing overtime-pay lawsuits", Seattle Times, 04/11/2004.

[FromTexas (Premo)]

http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/esa/ESA2004722.htm

“When workers know their rights and employers know how to pay workers, everybody wins,” added Chao. “With the ‘FairPay’ rule, we are restoring overtime to what it was intended to be: fair pay for workers, instead of a lawsuit lottery. And we will use these new clear standards to vigorously enforce the overtime laws on behalf of workers—building on this Administration’s strong record of pro-worker wage and hour enforcement.”

The new rules expand the number of workers eligible for overtime by nearly tripling the salary threshold. Under the 50-year-old regulations, only workers earning less than $8,060 annually were guaranteed overtime. Under the new rules, workers earning $23,660 or less are guaranteed overtime. This strengthens overtime protection for 6.7 million low-wage salaried workers, including 1.3 million salaried white collar workers who were not entitled to overtime pay under the existing regulations. These workers will gain up to $375 million in additional earnings every year.

BZZZZZT!!! Try again!

Only took me 3 minutes to read that and discredit it -- do I get a cookie?

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

...stiff one. Kerry seeks recipe. Tear-a-za says "No, dummy...a different kind of stiff one!"

Sen. Kerry says..."Oh. You mean...ho ha huh! Come here my little rich Cherie! You means like zees...Mwuh! Mwuh! Mwuh!...? Eh he he, mah little turtle dove...!!"

She playfully knocks all the Senators front teeth out. He recieves 7 more Purple Hearts.

Developing...

[Sparx]

BZZZZZT!!! Try again!

You better research it a little more before you take chow's opinion on anything. You believe everything she says?
NO COOKIE FOR YOU

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally posted by Sparx
BZZZZZT!!! Try again!

You better research it a little more before you take chow's opinion on anything. You believe everything she says?
NO COOKIE FOR YOU

Are you losing your OT?

[Pete (Premo)]

Why is it so hard to grasp that the lowest income bracket for OT was increased almost 4 fold adding over 6M people?

Why are you on this like a pit bull for months even though your every attempt at villifying GW and Labor Dept is stuffed back down your throat like a faked travel voucher?

Why do you come here everyday, spam some then duck and run?

Do you think anyone here believes you or the leftist propaganda mill where you are issued your daily info?

Do you think anyone here is stupid enough to fal into your "Scare them enough they will vote for Kerry" democrat tactics?

Do you think you are going to convert anyone here to a democrat with your weak asses showings?

What is your purpose? To stir things up? To sit back and giggle when the hornets attack? Are you the newsman who is coming over to save us?

I think you are a stooge who likes to get called names and thrashed, a sadist because there is no other reason for you to poke your tinfoil hat wearing head in here daily and spout then run away.

People like you have all but convinced me that being a liberal is in fact not a political stance but more like a birth defect.

[Sparx]

Originally posted by Pete
Are you losing your OT?

Nope, I'm a salary employee. But I know many people who will.

[FromTexas (Premo)]

Oh, yes. The strawman of I know people who will suffer.

Here is the crux of the argument in your post at the top - lets break it down:

The Administration
specifically told employers they could "cut workers' hourly wages and add the
overtime to equal the original salary, or raise salaries to the new $22,100
annual threshold, making them ineligible."

The first one = telling employers to be more responsible. If they can't afford overtime and its hurting them, then they should be paying salaries they can afford to pay. If people do not want those salaries, they can go elsewhere. It does not mean they can go below the fed minimum $5.15. At 40 hours a week that would be $10,712. Under the old plan, those people weren't guaranteed overtime. Now, under the new plan, employers are told to pay smart because they will now be forced to pay overtime from that $10,712 to $22,100 -- so, what does the administration do? Advise them to pay smart. If the company can't afford what they had been doing, then they need to pay less - common sense. I guess your logic would be to say -- you must pay the same salaries, and because we are now going to make this increase, your payrolls are going to increase 30-40% and you have no right to try and control your costs so you don't go out of business. It is only fair to warn businesses this is what will happen.

If people don't like that salary, they can go elsewhere. These same people weren't getting overtime before -- so, now they are getting lower wage plus overtime which equals the same pay. I doubt they are going to be crying over same pay for the same work they had been doing. It still can't lower much because of federal minimums.

On the number 2 part - So, everyone gets a raise beyond what they were paid the last year! Yaaaay! People now paid up to $10.62 an hour get overtime guaranteed!!! Remember, the people referred to weren't getting overtime before, so now they are getting a guaranteed raise.

Now, also remember that most everyone paid overtime anyway. Even above and beyond the overtime rules - they either received comp time or overtime. Comp time is time off 1:1, which is even better then overtime. I get paid my salary for an hour, and I can take an hour off of my choice and get paid for it later.

And one final point -- If you want to make it strict where they can not reduce pay or find other means of compensating, then all you will have is employers laying off workers to reduce costs you have just created. Thats what we need to do, make them assume the new cost and not be able to control it somehow so they can fire people!

Now, go get the next bit of info from your handlers, so we can send you crawling back into your dark corner again. A good sign for Republicans is how you post and run. All you can do is demonstrate that you can not think for yourself. You need someone else to find the words for you, and then you don't even understand the words enough to truly argue. You throw up crap like:

you better research it a little more before you take chow's opinion on anything. You believe everything she says?
NO COOKIE FOR YOU

Without ever making a large, well thought out post. Keep being one of the herd! I am sure they will tell you what to think next, too.





Simple question -- who lost overtime in the above argument?

[Tonio]

Originally posted by Sparx
Bush Works Overtime Keeping It Stiff

[Sparx]

The first one = telling employers to be more responsible. If they can't afford overtime and its hurting them, then they should be paying salaries they can afford to pay. If people do not want those salaries, they can go elsewhere. It does not mean they can go below the fed minimum $5.15. At 40 hours a week that would be $10,712. Under the old plan, those people weren't guaranteed overtime.

There's where they confuse you and you are wrong. The FLSA requires ALL hours over 40 in a work week to be paid at 1-1/2 times the regular hourly rate unless you are considered exempt by the FLSA