No more overtime pay?

[imperialprincess]

Has anyone seen some of the news reports about the new rules the Bush admin is trying get through about overtime pay rights?

I read something (sorry I don't have the reference) about new rules that would mean companies could tell their workers who make over 24K/year to work more than 40 hours in a week but would no longer be required by law (at least in my state--TX) to pay time and a half.

I think that is wrong. It is immoral and unethical.

I also think it shows the true nature of the Republican party and who it is owned by and works for -- especially Bush II!!

Corporations. They have changed the nature of capitalism into "corportism" and it is going to destory our country eventually. Frankly, I don't see anyway to stop it but I'll die trying.

--imp

[argonak]

if you&#39;re reffering to what i think you&#39;re reffering to, the target people were actually middle class technical folks (mainly engineers <wince> which is close to home), and not at all directed at 24k folks, most of whom tend to be paid on an hourly basis. it was targeted at salary earners.

my background up to now has all been hourly pay, and I like it that way. getting paid for what I do, rather than just them having me around.

[Mia]

It couldn&#39;t be referring to salaried employees - there is no such thing as time and a half for anyone but hourly.

[argonak]

actually i have a friend who is salaried, and is paid overtime based on an expected number of hours per year divided into his yearly salary.

he works for a government operated shipyard near seattle somewhere. can get the name tomorrow if you&#39;re interested. seems like a nice place to work.

not that it&#39;s paticuarly important bit of the post anyway.

[Mia]

I just meant it&#39;s not in the law for private companies.

[commonsense]

There should be no laws regulating what any adult gets paid.
Adults&#39; rights to freely enter into contracts of their own free will are what the government should be called upon to protect.
Labor Laws lead to corruption.
Let the government mint the coins, guard the coast, and ensure honest judges to adjudicate contract disputes.
Workers have the power and the right to collectively bargain, business cannot function without employees and vice-versa when workers price themselves out of the market...equally true, manufacturing needs consumers of suffiecient means to buy the products they produce.

The government can only screw up this equation.

When labor union leadership delivers blocs of votes to politicians in return for doing their bargaining work for them by creating labor "laws" instead of negotiated contracts, a number of bad things happen:

The labor leadership becomes lazy and free to involve itself in issues that do not serve its members directly, like politicking and channeling union dues toward causes and away from the members themselves,

Politicians become unresponsive to the people, having plenty of votes guaranteed "in their pockets" so they then be free to seek bigger connections elsewhere that can now be used to line their pockets with deals and money,

Workers are now tied to politicians for their livelihood, (instead of directly bargaining for pay against the employer) further enhancing politicians ability to get involved in dirty schemes because their getting thrown out of office is less likely because the huge bloc of union votes won&#39;t bite the hand that they see as feeding them...

Its at this point that the politicians set out to involve themselves in creating crises and "needs" that citizens could find efficient free-market solutions for, instead of taxation, but once sold on the idea that government can help you better than you can help yourselves, this is where politicians invent department after department, filling them with government workers and paying them well with the taxpayer&#39;s sweat and lifeblood, because these govt workers are even more sure a group to not bite the hand that feeds it than were the union members that made the leap from independent market force to being in the politician&#39;s pocket.

This creates government policies that further and further eat into the nation&#39;s production, feeding all sorts of skimmers at the top of either party, letting them get their hands on monies for ever more favors that should never have gotten into their hands to play with in the first place, good examples are going to war for dubious reasons, causing death and human suffering,
or creating inefficient self-serving bureaucracies like "housing" and "social work" and "education" that actually breed ignorance, incompetence, irresponsiblilty and dependency because large groups of people like this guarantee those running the system ever more money and jobs---which breeds human suffering and hopelessness among the underclass it creates and pretends to be empowering...

all because Mia thought THE GOVERNMENT and not the collaborative efforts of workers to negotiate should determine the pay one insists on.

[Mia]

I&#39;m laughing that over 40 hours is too much to work - that would be a vacation to me&#33;

BUT at some of the low-wage, hard jobs I think they should get time and a half for working over 40. At least 45 since the norm is closer to 50 now....

[Kyran]

Originally posted by imperialprincess,
Has anyone seen some of the news reports about the new rules the Bush admin is trying get through about overtime pay rights?

I read something (sorry I don&#39;t have the reference) about new rules that would mean companies could tell their workers who make over 24K/year to work more than 40 hours in a week but would no longer be required by law (at least in my state--TX) to pay time and a half.

I think that is wrong. It is immoral and unethical.

I also think it shows the true nature of the Republican party and who it is owned by and works for -- especially Bush II&#33;&#33;

Corporations. They have changed the nature of capitalism into "corportism" and it is going to destory our country eventually. Frankly, I don&#39;t see anyway to stop it but I&#39;ll die trying.

--imp

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYES&#33;

Go Bush&#33; You mean someone could work more than 40 hours a week at ONE JOB without the government coming in and sticking it&#39;s nose where it doesn&#39;t belong?&#33; That&#39;s AMAZING&#33; This will be the first Workers Rights success of the 21st century.

For too many years government has been used to oppress workers through their employers. The overtime regulations force poor people to work multiple jobs when they could just as easily work the same job more hours.

Pardon me, your highness, but we peasants actually get paid for the hours we work. We&#39;d rather work one job more hours than hassle with getting two of them. I remember when I worked at a hospital Mon-Fri in Inventory while selling tickets on the weekends for a tourist attraction. I got paid more at the hospital, and I feel that most 2nd jobs people take are usually for a lower pay.

Why do you consider it immoral and unethical to deregulate corporations in this area? I already know what kind of response you&#39;re going to give. See, the language you use reveals very much about your beliefs. You&#39;ll probably drop one or more of the following socialist propaganda lines:

1. Corporations abuse their workers
2. The law protects the workers
3. Workers have rights and need these laws

I could say "Hey, I&#39;m a worker, and I don&#39;t want my employer required to pay me overtime. Let him pay me what he wants, and schedule me as we agree." But you like most other people will just laugh and wonder why someone like me isn&#39;t locked up in an asylum somewhere.

I&#39;ll tell you what my workers rights are.

1. I have the right to choose my employer.
2. I have the right to be free of government interference in my pursuit of paying the goddamn rent.
3. I have the right to work as many hours as I want for ONE employer, instead of being forced to work two jobs like I&#39;m a retarded monkey.

Maybe some of you out there want to work like a retarded monkey.

Maybe we should reduce overtime to 1.5 over 20 hours JUST TO SEE HOW MANY FRIGGIN JOBS PEOPLE GET AS A RESULT. Have I made my point yet?

[Impenitent]

"Maybe some of you out there want to work like a retarded monkey."

imagining the gig... sitting around holding a cup while some dude twists the crank on a music box...

if you reduce overtime that low, people would have to get two or three jobs more because no one would get more than 20 hours per week... but the paper work alone would be great for bureaucrats and accountants... (edit: thinking about this... can you imagine the hundreds of millions of new jobs this would create? LMAO)

I&#39;ll hold the cup :)

[imperialprincess]

argonak:

My understanding also was that the new rules were aimed at people who earn MORE than 24k--sorry if I was confusing--and I guess that is part of my point there is a very large number of people who earn more than 24k but less than, let&#39;s say around 75K (I have no source for this--I am simply pulling a number out of the air based on my expirence and knowledge), who feel that without the protection of overtime pay requirements they would be drastically exploited.

I think they would be and it concerns me greatly.

And just an FYI, I would state that many of these workers (24k-75k range) are NOT in the middle class (or only barely), infact for a family of four, their income doesn&#39;t reach middle class status (using the 250% above the poverty level as set by the goverment) until about 40K. My source for this defination of "middle" vs. "lower" class is the goverment guidlines used to decide whether or not people qualify for services. One example most people are familiar with is the school lunch form most families get to see if they qualify for reduced or free lunches or breakfast at school for their kids.

BTW this issue hits very, VERY close to home for me too. My husband, my father & mother, my brothers, Aunts & Uncles, and nearly all the people I know would fit into this catagory (hourly worker paid more than 24K but less than 75K) so I admit that I may have a bias but I am trying to look at this issue as it would affect society as a whole not just myself.

[imperialprincess]

commonsense & Kyran:

You seem to have a very different view. I don&#39;t want this disscusion to turn into a black and white, pro vs. con. type of argument because I think this issue is a great deal more complicated than that but allow me to explain why I think your approach is flawed.

(I hestatie to include Kyran in this because your tone is so rude. Your attitude is exactly the kinda crap I am fed up with. I came to this site specifcally to avoid it. I will not respond to you directly unless you can get some manners. HOWEVER, I will respond to your ideas because they are common ones for people who want to change the laws re: workers rights. commonsense--thank you for your very polite, logical response. I look forward to an exchange with you. You may sharpen my arguement&#33;:>)) Or god forbid, change my mind&#33; (I doubt it because I have some pretty strong opinions and I have thought about this issue for a long time but I am willing to listen to what you have to say with an open mind.)

[commonsense]

Thank you for the kind words, Princess, and for noticing how charming I can be. I confess, I have been getting frustrated and just as vulgar as anyone else on here, of late. Maybe your feminine touch is just what this site needed, and thank you for reminding us all that the force of our arguments is enhanced through civility.
As far as your lukewarm but encouraging response to my post, may I suggest reading it again because we are approaching common ground, and its important that you see the inevitable connection all my posts make to "outside the box" (hate that expression) free-market solutions to all the world&#39;s problems by reducing the draining, morally and economically detrimental, self-serving drag that government superimposes upon our lives by force that is unnecessary...

Kyran, I didn&#39;t detect any rudeness and generally like your posts, but i guess from here-on out we&#39;ll have to behave ourselves because there&#39;s ladies present...
But you did overlook the positive dynamic that collective bargaining has played historically, and could again, once removed from corrupted government involvement in unconstitutional spheres.