Juan_Bottom wrote: patrickaa317 wrote:
I looked up the bill for you and check this out:
‘(1) GENERAL RULE- An employee may receive, in accordance with this subsection and in lieu of monetary overtime compensation, compensatory time off at a rate not less than one and one-half hours for each hour of employment for which overtime compensation is required by this section.
‘(ii) entered into knowingly and voluntarily by such employees and not as a condition of employment.
No employee may receive or agree to receive compensatory time off under this subsection unless the employee has worked at least 1,000 hours for the employee’s employer during a period of continuous employment with the employer in the 12-month period before the date of agreement or receipt of compensatory time off.
‘(A) MAXIMUM HOURS- An employee may accrue not more than 160 hours of compensatory time.
‘(4) PRIVATE EMPLOYER ACTIONS- An employer that provides compensatory time under paragraph (1) to employees shall not directly or indirectly intimidate, threaten, or coerce or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any employee for the purpose of--
‘(A) interfering with such employee’s rights under this subsection to request or not request compensatory time off in lieu of payment of monetary overtime compensation for overtime hours; or
‘(B) requiring any employee to use such compensatory time.
Thoughts now that I've helped give you information directly from the bill rather than your http://www.democratsrule-republicanssuck.com
This sounds like something my boss would say, as if I'm stupid enough to trust him. You're being very passively naive.
None of this is enforced, at all. There's no agency to report abuse to. All an employee can do is get a lawyer and sue. With 50% of the country having negative assets, who can afford that? This "protection" all sounds great, if you don't
think about it...
And what's up with the political divide? Everyone hates this bill. Everyone. If it was so great, America's workers would embrace it. In the least the unions would, if only to strengthen their bargaining power. But nobody supports this crap.
patrickaa317 wrote:Your example of a boss hiring someone to work 60 hours a week and forcing them to take comp time (in which they just have deferred OT payments at very very worst case scenario) is pretty weak. Why wouldn't a boss hire two people for 30 hours and pay 0 hours overtime?
Why would you ever hire two people when you only need to hire one?
That's less benefits to pay out. The incentive would be to hire less workers, and still get more work done when you need it. It's much cheaper in the long run.
If you have a busy period you force your workers to work overtime instead of hiring extra help. Then when things slow down, you force them to use their comp time. It's much cheaper for a large business to operate that way. There goes your 8-8-8.
How is the treatment different today if your son ends up in the hospital? Does your boss currently have to give you that time off and no longer does if this passes?
No he doesn't. But at least you'd already have your money in your hand to help meet any financial crisis. You would not have to wait 30 goddamn days for your money... Or give the company a fat loan on the hope that you'd have this time off when you needed it, only to be dismissed. How frustrating would that be to the worker working overtime?
This gets especially hart-wrenching when you think about single parent. They could be working crazy overtime hours, without the extra income. So how are they supposed to pay for the extra cost of having someone take care of their child? People need their overtime pay.
patrickaa317 wrote:Assuming $10/hour, 20 hours overtime. That is $300 overtime. At 3% interest (which is higher than most places would give you at the moment), it would be $9 per year, if you prorate that into a thirty day window, it's less than a dollar of interest you are missing out on. That's one of the biggest complaints around this bill?
These institutions are allowed to negotiate for loan rates, and they have a lot of capital on hand to loan out. Our American workers have 0 ability to negotiate any loan rate, and they don't have the money to loan out. 50% of Americans are low income or below the poverty line. If I'm going to loan out a 5th of my income, I'm gonna need to see 100,000% interest, because I need that money to get by.
patrickaa317 wrote:I see this as you are given 12 hours comp time for the 8 hours OT you worked. Can you show me in the bill where it's a one hour comp for one hour OT worked? I have a different understanding based on video you linked to, again 1:04 in the video
And I can't tell if you're doing research or just arguing the video.
I got that from President Leo W. Gerard. I haven't read the bill. And as the AFL-CIO explained, you work all this overtime, and get time off later, yeah it's paid time off, but it's money you already earned,.. so you were going to get it anyway. You're just losing out on the extra pay.