House Republicans Vote to Change the Overtime Pay Rule

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Fortune


Madeline Farber
May 03, 2017


House Republicans passed a bill on Tuesday that would let employers in the private-sector give workers paid time off instead of overtime pay.

The bill passed 229 to 197, and was largely along party lines, the Washington Post reports. No Democrats voted for the bill, and only six Republicans voted against it.
 
While Republicans think the bill will give greater flexibility to employers and their workers, notes the Post, Democrats think the bill undercuts the Fair Labor Standards act.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) was one Democrat who vehemently spoke out against it, tweeting on Tuesday that the bill is a "disgrace." But Republicans don't agree. "I don't think there's anything more powerful than giving them more control over their time so that they can make the best decisions for themselves and their families," Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington said of the bill, according to CNN.

Read more: http://fortune.com/2017/05/03/republicans-change-overtime-pay/

[Beartracks]

1. Why do Republicans hate Americans? n/t

[BigBearJohn]

2. G*R*E*E*D

[Matthew28]

3. Republicans have one goal and one goal only

To turn the clock back to the 18th century when the rich could do what ever the hell they pleased...

[atreides1]

27. Then the American people...

...should respond as the French did, in their revolution!

[FiveGoodMen]

55. And not as the French currently are: Considering installing a fascist of their own.

[IronLionZion]

29. It's to Make America Great Again

back when it was common to screw over workers and treat them like garbage because working people are clearly inferior beings.

[WoonTars]

34. This

In a nutshell...

[Maynar]

4. See, now

if said employees could make that decision , it would be in their interest. Since the decision is in the hands of the Massas, it is not.

"Oh Belvedere, come here boy!"

[Ligyron]

25. Treating them like a dog.

Yup.

[C Moon]

5. The GOP is drooling at the idea of taking us back to the industrial age.

Next to go will be child labor laws.

[WoonTars]

39. What was once considered absurd, is now quite possible...

...no healthcare, no overtime, are debtors prisons and workhouses far behind?

[C Moon]

62. And I think it REEKS of Russian and Putin.

How could the U.S. go from electing our first black president; having the first serious woman president contender in U.S. history; gain some wins in the fight for better healthcare; make huge gains in LGBT rights; marijuana legalization...and then end up with a GOP majority in the house, the senate and president.
It was thievery.

[Tobin S.]

6. The people who run corporations think it is in the corporation's best interest...

...to drive down wages a every opportunity. For most companies, labor is their largest expense and they are constantly looking for ways to spend less in that department. They'll move a company overseas if they think they'll come out ahead with the lower labor costs.

But here's the thing. Corporations need consumers. If you drive down wages too much you have fewer people who can afford your goods and services. That's one part of the equation that high profile business people, all those folks with MBAs, seem to be totally missing.

[safeinOhio]

11. Capitalism's moral compass only points in two directions

1. Self-interest
2. Greed

[Yavin4]

54. They're replacing wages with credit

Just give the people more and more debt to offset the loss in wages.

[Botany]

7. Anybody who voted for this should be a target in the next election.

Millions of people count on overtime pay.

[Thor_MN]

8. "I don't think there's anything more powerful than giving them more control over their time "

What is not said is "them" refers to the companies and "their" refers to the employees.

Properly stated "

"I don't think there's anything more powerful than giving the companies more control over the employee's time."

Republicans use pronouns to hide what they really mean from their sheeple.

Does anyone think this will be used as the employees wish? It will be used to create banks of PTO, basically a loan of labor, that the employees will never be able to collect on. I worked for a company that forced us to generate PTO, then ripped us off by changing policies that wiped out the companies debt to the employees.

[TheFrenchRazor]

63. right, WTF does that mean? this screws employees to benefit corporations, plain and simple. nt

[onetexan]

9. more cuts against the working class

wonder how those trumpians feel now that their overtime pay is cut. I know families where dads & moms depend on overtime hours to make ends meet each month. This is not good.

[Bengus81]

10. This will be massive ABUSE just waiting to happen.

Because the big boss man no longer has to pay dozens or hundreds of employee's overtime work them to death during the warm months then give them time off during the dead of winter. It keeps them from getting paid for ALL their overtime hours in the summer and then filing for unemployment in the winter if you work seasonal types of jobs.

This can be ABUSED so easily. Hire a load of workers,have them work 50-60 hours a week for months and then lay them off or fire the ones you don't like. Sure,they could file for unemployment,but they still get FUCKED out of all that overtime.

Hope all those republican Union HATERS are the first workers to have this SHAM foisted on them.

[INdemo]

12. The hand writing is on the Wall ..Up Next

Is a National Right To Work Law..Why? Because that is what the Kock Brothers want and the fucking Republicans will grant them their wish.

[HockeyMom]

13. Public School tried this

They wanted Paras to work an extra hour every day for the entire school year. "We'll give you Comp time off instead of OT pay". Do the math on how much time off that would be. How much OT money would be lost? Subs would have to be hired to replace us if we took an entire day off.

Fortunately, Paras were Unionized. Union told them NO that they had to pay OT to Hourly, Non-Exempt Staff. The school hired part timers.

[Captain Stern]

14. This isn't as bad as some sources are making it sound.

The choice of whether or not to take comp time instead of pay is up to the employee. The employee can change that decision at any time.

The employee can cash out their unused comp time any time they want, if they decide they'd rather have the money.

If an employee quits, or is terminated, they are paid for any accrued comp time.

Here's a link to the actual Bill:

[link:https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr1180/BILLS-115hr1180rh.pdf|

[sinkingfeeling]

16. Never worked before. I left a position after decades of promised

'Comp time' and never got a penny for it, as I never got the time off either.

[Captain Stern]

22. You were cheated.

However, according to the Bill, this couldn't happen to you.

To begin with, you'd only be able to accrue up to 160 hours. Also on January 1st, the employer would be required to pay you for any comp time that you had accrued during the previous year, that you hadn't used by December 31st....even if you didn't want him to.

[Honeycombe8]

33. That could have happened with payment in money, too.

What your employer did was illegal. An employer who doesn't pay his employees, whether the payment is in money or time, is breaking the law. Why did you stay so long?

Either way, that's no argument against having the choice. Since it assumes everyone will act in accordance with the law.

[Yonnie3]

37. Same here - but just under a decade of employment

I was working at a medical school and on the state payroll. I was required to work many holidays and comp time was "booked" to take off later. I requested that time each year, to add to my vacation, and was denied. When the research grants dried up, I was laid off. I was told there was no money to pay me for the comp time and that it was my fault for not taking it off. They did not pay me unused sick time, even though they had taken additional money from the grants for that time. Part of the reason grants dried up was because of these practices. Soon after I left, Federal grants required them to mend their ways or not receive grants.

[Bengus81]

17. Then what's the point of it?

Or...if you accrue say 200 hours of over time not paid for and your boss goes out of business. Basically,your loaning your boss money and hoping to hell you get it back some day.

[Captain Stern]

21. The point of it is to give emplyees the option of time off instead of overtime pay.

The risk you point out exists, so that would be a good reason to not take that option. However, if an employee feels that the company they work for isn't in risk of going out of business, why not let them make that choice?

[Kingofalldems]

42. The point is to make it easier for employers.

Employees will be intimidated into accepting comp time and then never receive it. Fact.

[Bengus81]

59. If you need to be at your job so much to rack up all that overtime.........

then just how could you get all the days off to use it up? Boss going to hire people just to fill in for that worker being off a day or two?? This bill is just silly SHIT. People work overtime because they need the CASH,not a day setting at home. That's what vacation pay is for.

Gawd...........

[Captain Stern]

60. If you're correct, then most people will choose to take the pay.

I would probably take the pay in most cases also. However, I don't begrudge someone else that may choose to take the comp time instead, the opportunity to do so. Everyone's circumstances are different.

[Honeycombe8]

35. Seems to me that if a worker accumulates that much OT time....

he knows he's not getting "paid" for that time, and needs to report it.

The bill, or the employer's policy, should state clearly that the comp time must be allowed and taken within a certain amount of time.

Ultimately, we all have to do what the employer wants, if we want a good relationship with our employer. If the co. would rather pay you money for OT, then it's probably best to do it that way. If the employer would rather pay in comp time, to save the money, then it's probably best for the employee to do it that way.

Current law, as I understand it, is that an employer MUST pay for OT within a certain amount of time. The same would apply to comp time payment.

[neohippie]

18. It's still less money than they earn now

Even if an employee can cash out at any time, they're losing the overtime pay rate, so it's a loss of wages

[Captain Stern]

19. No, they're not.

If an employee works 50 hours in a week, he's worked 10 hours of overtime. If he accepts the pay, he'd be payed time-and-a-half. He'd basically be paid for 15 hours instead of 10. If he accepts the comp time, he's given 15 hours of comp time. If he later decides to cash it out, he'll be paid for 15 hours.....the same as if he'd taken the pay up front. The only money being lost would be the interest that money would have accrued.

[neohippie]

28. Thanks for clarifying that.

I made a bad assumption that the comp-time would just be equal to the number of hours worked over the employees normal hours, and not at time and a half

[cstanleytech]

30. What about interest? Say the employee has collected 200 hours of comp time and wants to cash it out

does the company have to pay the employee interest on the money for all the time its been accumulating?

[Captain Stern]

40. It doesn't appear so.

However, an employee can't accumulate over 160 hours. Also, any comp time accumulated in a given calendar year, that isn't used in that calendar year, must be paid out to the employee no later than January 31st of the following year. (This is not optional for either the employer or employee).

So, the loss of interest on comp time that's cashed out later would be a reason to not accept the comp time to begin with, however the amount of lost interest wouldn't be that great.

[Kingofalldems]

43. Who will enforce this Captain Stern?

Was money provided in the bill for such enforcement?

[Captain Stern]

44. I assume it would be the same people that enforce our existing labor laws. nt

[Kingofalldems]

46. GOP will NOT give them more money for enforcement.

Guess maybe you didn't consider that fact.

[Captain Stern]

47. Why would they necessarily need more money?

Why would it cost more to enforce the rules concerning comp time, than it costs now to enforce the rules concerning overtime pay?

[Kingofalldems]

48. Because overtime is established.

This is new and ripe for abuse. Looks like you agree with republicans on a bill not ONE Democrat voted for.

So now I get it.

[Captain Stern]

49. I don't base what I do, or don't, agree with on how other people did, or didn't, vote.

I do my best to base my opinions on verifiable facts.

It rarely happens, but even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while. But, if I were to actually see a blind squirrel find an acorn, I wouldn't deny it, regardless of how many other people refused to believe it happened.

[Honeycombe8]

36. Does it say that? OT reverts to straight time, instead of time and a half? nt

[Kingofalldems]

31. There will be no money for enforcement of this rule-

therefore employees will work OT for nothing in many cases.

[guillaumeb]

51. In an employee/employer relationship,

the employer has all of the advantages.

And given the large number of cases of wage theft and/or wage fraud that occur every year, it is easy to see how employers will circumvent these provisions. Given that only 10% of all employees are covered by actual labor agreements, if an employer miscalculates how much time an employee is owed, we can all foresee who will win in these situations.

Like all GOP proposals, the spin is far different from the reality.

[Captain Stern]

56. The employers definitely almost always have the advantage

And I agree that an employer could "miscalculate" how much time an employee is owed. However couldn't that same unscrupulous employer "miscalculate" how much overtime an employee is owed? This bill doesn't create any problems for employees that don't already exist, and it actually gives private sector employees more options than they have now.

I don't think for a moment that the republicans are in favor of this bill because they care about employees. I think they are in favor of this bill because it makes them look like they care about employees.

This bill actually helps employees a little without costing employers a dime. I think that if this proposal were going to cost employers anything, they wouldn't be in favor of it.

[guillaumeb]

65. I disagree.

The Bill gives employers the ability to schedule with no concern for anything but their own business needs. An employer could schedule employees to work 80 hours a week in a busy period and send these workers home with no pay when business is slow. Good for the employers, bad for the laid off, unpaid employees. There is no appreciable benefit for the employees whose schedules would be entirely at the whim of the employers.

[Captain Stern]

66. An employer can do the same thing now.

Employee's schedules are already pretty much at the whim of the employer. This bill doesn't change that. It doesn't make it any easier, or harder, for an unscrupulous employer to cheat his employees. It just gives private sector employees the option to take time-and-a-half comp time in lieu of time-and-a-half pay for hours worked over 40 hours.

Any employees that are laid off would still have to be paid for their accrued comp time, just like they would have to be paid any owed wages.

[guillaumeb]

69. There have been responses here that talk of employees being cheated.

And given the number of incidences of wage theft, this is not surprising. But if an employee currently has a regular schedule, this could disappear. And if any employee did not or could not work 16 hours one day and none the next, that employee will probably be fired.

[sinkingfeeling]

15. Hey, Trump voters, there goes your Overtime! Still believe he's

for the workers?

[lark]

20. Freaking liars.

This doesn't give people control over their time as employers decide when they get to take the time off and can refuse to let them take the time off or even fire them and never pay them. It's a naked assault on labor rights and I hope and pray the Senate doesn't pass this and will not void the filibuster to get everything through to totally change our country and make it a dictatorship of the oligarchs.
It's already well on it's way and if the Senate approves this and the healthcare act, America's workers just become so much less wealthy and sicker. All of this foisted on us by traitors to the country and it's constitution. Sickening!

[Turbineguy]

23. In a way this would achieve the opposite.

Overtime at 1-1/2 times regular pay is often less expensive than regular pay because of benefits. Benefits are not paid for overtime.

Say you work 4 10-hour days and get Friday off. Productivity increases slightly during your 4 days on and nothing gets done on your Friday off. Benefits accrue based on 5 days.

When republicans talk about "choice" it means something else. To republicans, victims choose to get shot.

[Honeycombe8]

38. I got employer contributions to my 401k on OT pay.

So I did get a benefit for that overtime pay. Since I worked a lot of OT for several years, I got not only the money for the work, but also a nice amount of money added to my 401k.

I also got a free meal for some of that OT (if yu worked over 10 hours in a day, you were entitled to a free meal, or you could turn in a meal voucher & get $7 or something). So I got that benefit.

[Turbineguy]

64. Cool!

I used to work in a high overtime environment.

At one point I would work 6 hours of OT per week day, 14 on Saturday, then on Sunday I would rest and only work 8. This went on for months.

We were able to convert OT to vacation; 8 hours OT, 1-1/2 days vacation.

[Javaman]

24. and the middle, lower middle and poor classes will just get that much poorer. nt

[OnDoutside]

26. It's the "instead of" that is the disgraceful bit. My brother works for a

US pharma company here in Europe and he has the OPTION of taking overtime pay or time off, so he has been working lots of extra nights and weekends over the last 12 months, and is currently off on holiday for 7 weeks in Australia and Asia.

[duncang]

32. The big company incentive. Interest they get on unpaid wages

They will be getting interest on all the money so this bill will be a windfall for them.

[Honeycombe8]

41. I worked a lot of OT for several years, and got paid for it.

I would have preferred to be able to get TIME off, instead of pay, for at least some of that. I was so overworked that I couldn't think straight. My employer would have preferred that I get paid money for the OT, since my comp time would have been in normal business hours, and would have been a hardship for the company not having me there during the day doing my regular job.

But the truth is, I was so overloaded with work that I would not have been able to take the time off. So it worked out for everyone better that I get paid money for the OT, I suppose. That huge project ended, I got some rest, and then was very happy with the extra money in my checking account. But it was murder working through all the late nights and working every weekend.

[workinclasszero]

45. MAGA baby!

How do the foolish working class Trump voters like their god emperor now huh?????

[Bayard]

50. My husband is currently working 72-80 hour weeks out of state

Only gets to come home once a month. Its a small family owned company. The owner is promising they'll be paid for all this OT, but so far, nada. Of course, he is building a new million-dollar home.

I am encouraging him to start putting his resume together. I don't trust this company like we once did to pay him what they owe. Something is shakey. They also took away his extra management pay after the last project ended. He knows if he reports not getting paid for OT, he'll be fired immediately--also not legal, but there you go.

Both of us are 60 years old. We're too old for this shit. No way we can afford to retire.

[guillaumeb]

52. Yours is the reality, as opposed to the GOP spin.

They love to talk about freedom, but it is the freedom of the rich to exploit the workers.

[lunasun]

57. Hope you are keeping records for a labor case. Why the delay in the ot pay?

[Bayard]

61. Tight lipped

They're not saying.

[lunasun]

67. Beware the longer you wait the harder to prove your case within a state labor dept. claim

The big question will be why didn't you come forward the month , week it wasn't on your check ?So unless he has it in writing , why the delay should be a question answered. Tight lipped means they don't want to tell you something doesn't it?
To anyone else looking at the ot claim it is your word against a company really

Working out of state would possibly be another issue on claiming the money .
Corporations can claim bankruptcy and resurrect under a new name . The new company owes you nothing and the old one is legally no longer obligated.
Another scenario is the owner will bargain n what is owed in OT so you better have lots of backup info to bargain back.

[Grins]

53. I had a great summer job in the late 60's....

It was a union job in a factory that paid well.

The key there (for a college student) was to get on the 2nd or 3rd shifts that paid a premium on each hour. But more than that - get overtime!! Time and a half on Saturday's, double time - and sometimes triple time! That's where I made enough money to cover my tuition, room, board, and books and start all over the following summer.

And if they gave me paid time off for the overtime instead? I wouldn't do it. No one would take it. Why would I/they?

So if an employer today wants an employee to work overtime and the employee says no...?

The only way this can work is for the law to say the employee cannot say no.

[lunasun]

58. Because when companies have people working on overtime it is so easy to get time off

[Kimchijeon]

68. Whatever is in the interest of corporations, that's what they want

Peasants have no protection in this government. It's not that they "hate" us, just that they are doing what they are paid to do: make sure to enact whatever legislation is greatest for corporate profit, in all sectors. It's banal business as usual. Of course to us bugs on the windshield it seems pretty cruel and nasty.

I know it's a vague thing to say and at this point rather impossible to fight against, but at least it helps to know why. Maybe after some catastrophic annihilation we can rebuild from the ashes.

I'm thinking, say, a meteor strike or something.