Obama returns to push for more Overtime pay

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

KevinKohler said:
Ok, well, being as jobs don't grow on trees, and almost ALL retailers in the US operate this way, it whittles down my list of options.
Just google the number of OT suits are happening and have happened in the last three years to get a better understanding of the scope of the issue.

Here's an idea? Why don't I go to work with the minimal expectation that my billion dollar a year corporation knows, understands, and OBEYS the labor laws of this country, rather than settle for joblessness due to a mindset of refusing to work for an employer who illegally takes advantage of some of its employees? Crazy thought, I know, lol.

How does any lawsuit create a good relationship between employees and their employer? Think about it

I worked for a retailer as well which gave me the opportunity for quite an education in both retail operations and management. Could have started a business anytime I wanted but chose not to do that. That was my choice although qualified to do that. Until you have been in the shoes of management most employees have no clue as to what is being faced and employees that sue are part of the problem. Sit down with management and discuss the issue, don't destroy any personal relationship you have.

Thinking that an employer is violating the laws of the land isn't a company you should be working for in the first place.

sangha · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
How does any lawsuit create a good relationship between employees and their employer? Think about it

A business that is cheating its' employees out of pay that they are legally obligated to pay does not have a good relationship with its' employees to begin with

Think about it

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

sangha said:
Since employers cut the pay of those they pay overtime to, Conservative's claim that requiring them to pay OT will cost them money and drive them out of business is obviously untrue. Instead, they will save money and business will prosper

You seem like you are such an expert on this issue please site the experience you have to make claims like this? How does increasing costs make a business survive and prosper?

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

sangha said:
A business that is cheating its' employees out of pay that they are legally obligated to pay does not have a good relationship with its' employees to begin with

Think about it

Why would you or anyone else who believes in choice choose to work for any company that cheats its employees? Start your own business and solve your own problem. All talk and no action seems to be the agenda of liberals and progressives.

Going to Church, bbl.

sangha · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
You seem like you are such an expert on this issue please site the experience you have to make claims like this? How does increasing costs make a business survive and prosper?

If, as ludin posted, employers are cutting their employees pay in response to these OT regulations, then the businesses will save money.

I don't know about you, but to me,"cutting pay" doesn't sound like a thing that increases costs

sangha · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
Why would you or anyone else who believes in choice choose to work for any company that cheats its employees? Start your own business and solve your own problem. All talk and no action seems to be the agenda of liberals and progressives.

Going to Church, bbl.

Why would any business that believes paying OT will increase its' costs choose to have its' employees work OT?

It works both ways.

KevinKohler · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
How does any lawsuit create a good relationship between employees and their employer? Think about it

I worked for a retailer as well which gave me the opportunity for quite an education in both retail operations and management. Could have started a business anytime I wanted but chose not to do that. That was my choice although qualified to do that. Until you have been in the shoes of management most employees have no clue as to what is being faced and employees that sue are part of the problem. Sit down with management and discuss the issue, don't destroy any personal relationship you have.

Thinking that an employer is violating the laws of the land isn't a company you should be working for in the first place.

That's not the purpose of the lawsuit. The purpose is to make the company obey the law.

I AM management. I'm in training for a DM job, currently spending my time between 4 different, 1 mil per week stores.

Again, google is your friend. This is not an isolated problem, it's widespread. Simply quitting and hoping my next employer won't do the same thing is a pretty bad bet to make. And once done, I'm STUCK there for two years, as employers hiring someone at my level won't consider work history that's less than two years. It policy almost everywhere now.

Or, again, crazy thought, here...I could oblige my current employer to obey the law?

KevinKohler · Mar 16, 2014

And if paying your help well, treating them fairly and legally, is so unprofitable...explain Google? Costco, my direct competitor?

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

sangha said:
A business that is cheating its' employees out of pay that they are legally obligated to pay does not have a good relationship with its' employees to begin with

Think about it

Why would you or anyone else who believes in choice choose to work for any company that cheats its employees? Start your own business and solve your own problem. All talk and no action seems to be the agenda of liberals and progressives.

Going to Church, bbl.

sangha · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
Why would you or anyone else who believes in choice choose to work for any company that cheats its employees?

Why would any business that believes paying OT will increase its' costs choose to have its' employees work OT?

It works both ways.

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

sangha said:
Why would any business that believes paying OT will increase its' costs choose to have its' employees work OT?

It works both ways.

No, overtime is a choice a company chooses to authorize and having overtime is an increase in expenses thus most businesses won't work people over 40 hours. Since you have never run a business, never had to make a payroll you are very poorly informed on the issue. It is always easy for someone like you to spend someone else's money

By the way, cheating is what liberals always use when a business hires someone at a specific salary and then pays them that salary which is contrast to what a non employee or someone who lacks business experience thinks they should be paid.

sangha · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
No, overtime is a choice a company chooses to authorize and having overtime is an increase in expenses thus most businesses won't work people over 40 hours .

The fact that these companies are being sued for working people more than 40 hours without pay proves you're wrong.

Since you have never run a business, never had to make a payroll you are very poorly informed on the issue. It is always easy for someone like you to spend someone else's money

I have several businesses. Like the rest of your claims, this claim is inaccurate

By the way, cheating is what liberals always use when a business hires someone at a specific salary and then pays them that salary which is contrast to what a non employee or someone who lacks business experience thinks they should be paid.

Not paying non-exempt employees for the overtime they work is not only cheating, it's illegal.

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

sangha;1063040330]The fact that these companies are being sued for working people more than 40 hours without pay proves you're wrong.

Wrong, people suing are salaried employees who agreed to accept a salary and the terms of employment which means they don't punch a time clock. Now you want to change the terms of the contract. There is nothing illegal about a salaried employee working more than 40 hours. Some weeks I worked 80 hours and other weeks I may have worked 20. Seems most sour salaried employees don't remember the times they took off without telling the company

I have several businesses. Like the rest of your claims, this claim is inaccurate

You have shown no indication that you have any businesses or employees. Do you want the govt. to tell you what you have to pay your employees?

Not paying non-exempt employees for the overtime they work is not only cheating, it's illegal.

Who says a salaried employee is non exempt?

sangha · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
Wrong, people suing are salaried employees who agreed to accept a salary and the terms of employment which means they don't punch a time clock.

Salaried employees can be non-exempt and the law requires them to be paid OT

Now you want to change the terms of the contract.

Agreements that involve criminal activity are not contracts.

Who says a salaried employee is non exempt?

The law

SBu · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
Obama returns to push for more overtime pay amid concerns from GOP, businesses | Fox News

Here is another example of a total incompetent trying to micromanage the private sector and lacking the experience to even understand the private sector. Obama won't be happy until all Americans are dependent on liberalism and private businesses are controlled by the govt. First minimum wage, now overtime pay for salaried employees, what is next?

How about you liberals promoting this bull**** start your own businesses, be the last one paid, pay all the taxes and regulations, and meeting all the employment responsibilities. Put your money where your mouth is.

Has he ever held a real honest job in his life? That's a legit question. I don't really know. I know that he was a community organizer which = fake made up job. I know he was involved in state and federal politics which = crooked job. Has he ever worked for a company before?

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

sangha said:
Salaried employees can be non-exempt and the law requires them to be paid OT

Agreements that involve criminal activity are not contracts.

The law

Then salaried employees who are non exempt should be put on the clock, have their pay reduced to the hourly rate, and prevented from working enough hours to qualify for overtime. Amazing how short sighted you are.

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

SBu said:
Has he ever held a real honest job in his life? That's a legit question. I don't really know. I know that he was a community organizer which = fake made up job. I know he was involved in state and federal politics which = crooked job. Has he ever worked for a company before?

No, there isn't a company in the world that would have hired him for a management position based upon his resume which just goes to show how easily some people are sold a bill of goods simply by rhetoric. Obama said he was going to transform America but the people who voted for him didn't ask that that transformation would look like. We now know, high unemployment, low economic growth, massive numbers of discouraged workers, and high debt. That hope and change message was nothing more than hot air that still resonates today.

sangha · Mar 16, 2014

Conservative said:
Then salaried employees who are non exempt should be put on the clock, have their pay reduced to the hourly rate, and prevented from working enough hours to qualify for overtime. Amazing how short sighted you are.

So you think the business that chose to make them salaried are too stupid to make the right decision!!! :lamo

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

sangha said:
So you think the business that chose to make them salaried are too stupid to make the right decision!!! :lamo

Salaried employees who are suing the company are going to find out exactly show stupid those businesses are when they make them hourly employees, reduce their pay, and prevent them from working more than 40 hours a week.

opendebate · Mar 16, 2014

sangha said:
Salaried employees can be non-exempt and the law requires them to be paid OT

People seem to be having an incredibly difficult time grasping this concept.

Conservative · Mar 16, 2014

opendebate said:
People seem to be having an incredibly difficult time grasping this concept.

You seem to be unable to grasp the concept that with a salary comes freedom as well and not all Salaried employees are as pure as you would want them to be. I am all for putting these people back on the clock and let's see how they like being tied down to a desk for 40 hours a week.

sangha · Mar 17, 2014

Conservative said:
Salaried employees who are suing the company are going to find out exactly show stupid those businesses are when they make them hourly employees, reduce their pay, and prevent them from working more than 40 hours a week.

And the businesses will find out how stupid their criminal acts were when their employees go to work for law abiding companies

But it's nice to see you on the side of criminals and against the enforcement of the law.

sangha · Mar 17, 2014

opendebate said:
People seem to be having an incredibly difficult time grasping this concept.

No, they grasp it. They just believe that it's OK to break the law if you're a business.

For some people, it's always about who is on the "home team" and enforcing their own morality on everyone else, even if the facts prove that their morality causes everyone to suffer.

sangha · Mar 17, 2014

Conservative said:
You seem to be unable to grasp the concept that with a salary comes freedom as well and not all Salaried employees are as pure as you would want them to be. I am all for putting these people back on the clock and let's see how they like being tied down to a desk for 40 hours a week.

No, salary doesn't come with any sort of freedom. The only benefit to being salaried is having a predetermined amount of money paid to you on a regular basis. It does not mean you will or can work anything less than 40 hours a week. In fact, most salaried jobs require 40 hours/wk (at least) and that you be on the job during specific scheduled hours.

Conservative · Mar 17, 2014

sangha said:
And the businesses will find out how stupid their criminal acts were when their employees go to work for law abiding companies

But it's nice to see you on the side of criminals and against the enforcement of the law.

Yes, there are bad apples in business just like there are bad apple employees. You seem to focus only on the bad apple businesses. Most problems like this can be solved by sitting down with management not going through the courts. The liberal answer is to throw a tantrum and go to an activist judge