• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Millions more workers would be eligible for overtime pay under new federal rule

Southern Dad said:
The job is based upon 40 hours a week. Some managers will work 40. Some will work 50. Some will work 30. It all depends on how good they are at managing. When I became a DM with the AJC, I initially work 60 hours a week. But after a few weeks, I got my district under control and was easily working less than 40 every week.
Click to expand...

So your company was being magnanimous in paying you for a 40 hours a week when the job required much less?.

I wish I worked for a company that was that altruistic.
 
cpwill said:
Yes. Generally I am against screwing over people who earn below the median income by making it harder for them to find employment, and employment that is flexible to the needs of their lives.


This isn't Free Stuff For Salaried Low Level Managers. It's A New Barrier To Hiring And Retaining Salaried Low Level Managers. When you increase the price for a good or service, you reduce the demand for it, and when you reduce the ability of employees and employers to find mutually agreeable terms, you reduce the incidence of them being able to do so. :shrug: Welcome to the Dismal Science.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. Some things are in demand exactly BECAUSE they are expensive.
 
Russell797 said:
Executives are not making $23K either. My wife was a salaried financial analyst for many years before retirement and routinely worked over 50 hour per week. Never missed days or took days off (the work would always be waiting for her when she got back even from vacations) She had to find time to get it all done. Being a woman and the lowest payed in her position ($62K) she was everyone's goto person for assistance with issues. She was indispensable for years until her job was outsourced to Mexico and the Philippines. That's right, two people abroad to do what she had done alone and obviously the company still made out on the deal.
Click to expand...

That 23K per year number was set decades ago, when 23K was damn good pay.
 
KevinKohler said:
Not entirely true. Some things are in demand exactly BECAUSE they are expensive.
Click to expand...

Hm.

True. Some goods benefit from a desire for luxury (though that's not exactly the same thing). "Labor", however, doesn't strike me as one of those goods, generally. You don't collect employees so that you can show them off to your friends, you hire employees to make your business succeed.
 
Re: Will this end salaried entry level management positions?

Southern Dad said:
If you are salaried and work less than forty then should the company also dock you? Is that also plain and simple?
Click to expand...

There is a reason why you are salaried. That salary is a guarantee of the minimum amount you will be paid.
 
cpwill said:
Hm.

True. Some goods benefit from a desire for luxury (though that's not exactly the same thing). "Labor", however, doesn't strike me as one of those goods, generally. You don't collect employees so that you can show them off to your friends, you hire employees to make your business succeed.
Click to expand...

Agreed.



Tell me....when was the 24K minimum set for the executive exempt category of employee?

1975. In today's money, that would be a little over 100K, I wager. 100K per YEAR.


And you, and business owners and executives (actual executives, not just miss classed workers) are pissing and moaning over 47K, which is STILL below the median. 100K is, what, in the 90th percentile of pay in this country?
 
KevinKohler said:
Agreed.

Tell me....when was the 24K minimum set for the executive exempt category of employee?

1975. In today's money, that would be a little over 100K, I wager. 100K per YEAR.
Click to expand...

$106,733.53

So tell me. Why is this a relevant statistic?
 
cpwill said:
$106,733.53

So tell me. Why is this a relevant statistic?
Click to expand...

In the 70s, this was considered the wage that people who are classified as executive exempt deserved. In the 70s. Did doom and gloom strike then? Economic ruin as a result?


Further, what is the caliber of person, today, that you would expect to be pulling 6 figures?
 
PS

I DIG that inflation calc.
 
Re: Will this end salaried entry level management positions?

Texmex said:
You do know that you are talking out of your ass, don't you? My father-in-law and his brother laugh at gringos like you. Continue in your ignorance if you want. Next thing I know you will be telling me Trump will win a majority of the Hispanic vote.
Click to expand...

Hah! I'm grabbing random family members as an example to point out you don't know as much about them as you think. Whether they are white or Hispanic is immaterial to the point. Also, you say you know a lot of illegals and married a Mexican woman.. all you are proving is that your immediate family is less Mexican than you implied. :lol:
 
Re: Will this end salaried entry level management positions?

Kal'Stang said:
And if you get caught doing this not only will you be out of a business but you and your employee's will be getting stuck talking to the IRS and being audited. Possibly even jail time. And all it takes to get caught is one disgruntled employee or even one disgruntled person that applied for the job and didn't get it because they thought you were being unfair.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of people that employ people under the table will never get caught.
 
Re: Will this end salaried entry level management positions?

jmotivator said:
Hah! I'm grabbing random family members as an example to point out you don't know as much about them as you think. Whether they are white or Hispanic is immaterial to the point. Also, you say you know a lot of illegals and married a Mexican woman.. all you are proving is that your immediate family is less Mexican than you implied. :lol:
Click to expand...

I'm through. Think what you want.
 
David_N said:
Your entire argument is flawed. As of right now, America has the most regulations in our history if what I hear from posters on here is correct, and yet, employment numbers are pretty damn solid, would be higher if we had more sales. That's a symptom of low aggregate demand though, which is a problem on its own. You're applying Econ 101 to the real world, which is extremely complex and doesn't fit the new classical dogma. It never has. "Mutually agreeable terms." Spare us the nonsense. Employees aren't winning right now.
Click to expand...

So anyway, what about those salaries? lol. I think it's funny that ever since the sixties salaries have been declining. But hey, don't pay any mind to elephant in the room. Employment numbers are fine, and those salaries, greedy business men. :lamo
 
Henrin said:
So anyway, what about those salaries? lol. I think it's funny that ever since the sixties salaries have been declining. But hey, don't pay any mind to elephant in the room. Employment numbers are fine, and those salaries, greedy business men. :lamo
Click to expand...
Globalization, which isn't a bad thing, Along with the decline in unions.
 
jaeger19 said:
So your company was being magnanimous in paying you for a 40 hours a week when the job required much less?.

I wish I worked for a company that was that altruistic.
Click to expand...

It depends upon the manager. I've got one manager who probably works 35 hours a week most weeks but she'll peg 50+ hours a week when she has problems. I have other managers who are always over 40 hours. When I was a district manager, I worked very hard getting my district in order then I didn't have to work so hard. Since, I was always getting my full MBO and was constantly raking #1 in service and new starts no one cared how many hours that I worked.
 
Re: Will this end salaried entry level management positions?

TheDemSocialist said:
There is a reason why you are salaried. That salary is a guarantee of the minimum amount you will be paid.
Click to expand...

Right but you want to pay overtime for everything over 40 hours but not dock anyone for under 40. Sure sounds like another way to screw over the employer.
 
Southern Dad said:
It depends upon the manager. I've got one manager who probably works 35 hours a week most weeks but she'll peg 50+ hours a week when she has problems. I have other managers who are always over 40 hours. When I was a district manager, I worked very hard getting my district in order then I didn't have to work so hard. Since, I was always getting my full MBO and was constantly raking #1 in service and new starts no one cared how many hours that I worked.
Click to expand...

And that's great. It's also an exception.

In MY business, when a manager manages to get his work hours down, it's a sign that it's time to cut his payroll.
 
Re: Will this end salaried entry level management positions?

Southern Dad said:
Right but you want to pay overtime for everything over 40 hours but not dock anyone for under 40. Sure sounds like another way to screw over the employer.
Click to expand...

That poor, poor, record profit margin every single year employer.


It's one or the other. Either pay salaried managers enough to live off of, or pay them for time worked past 40 hours.
 
cpwill said:
Yes. Generally I am against screwing over people who earn below the median income by making it harder for them to find employment, and employment that is flexible to the needs of their lives.


This isn't Free Stuff For Salaried Low Level Managers. It's A New Barrier To Hiring And Retaining Salaried Low Level Managers. When you increase the price for a good or service, you reduce the demand for it, and when you reduce the ability of employees and employers to find mutually agreeable terms, you reduce the incidence of them being able to do so. :shrug: Welcome to the Dismal Science.
Click to expand...

Do you even get what is being discussed. Prior to this change, you could be salaried at just 23k a year, work 60 hours a week, and not get a cent in overtime. The change is that now you have to be salaried at least 47k a year (which is still a modest income) without being paid overtime for working over 40 hours a week.

As to why someone would take such a job, it is usually the case that such jobs are in rural areas or in the inner city where an employer can pay what he likes and pocket the rest without fear of other employers hiring away his exploited workers - which is exactly the situation that labor laws are designed to prevent. So if you are for someone being paid just 23k a year and never being compensated for any time over 40 hours a week, then you are obviously against any labor protections because that is pretty damn basic. I mean its not like we are talking about a living wage or anything like that. Its a basic labor protection to ensure that someone earning so little is not exempt from getting overtime pay.
 
Re: Will this end salaried entry level management positions?

Texmex said:
If I know who you were, I would turn you in today! Nothing is as chicken **** as an employer cheating workers out of overtime.
Click to expand...

It was a deal agreed to by everyone before the time was worked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom