A Middle Class win - with new Jobs!!!

You've probably heard that the administration has raised the overtime limit for exempt salaried employees from roughtly 22K to 50K. The threshold has only had a small bump in level during the last 39 years.

www.usatoday.com...

My first - good job - was a non-exempt salaried job with a Union Aerospace Firm. We occassionly worked overtime, largely when a RFP (Request for Proposal - the Federal Government used to encourage competition and didn't just hand out contracts to 'friends') was due. Mostly we worked our 40 hours and enjoyed a pleasant but by no means comfortable life. When we got more work - we hired more happy people, that worked hard for their 40 hours and everyone - everyone prospered.

It all changed.... and I was there when another company (I guess I should name names here really - General Motors) bought the company I worked for, Hughes Aircraft, and decreed that all non-exempt employees would always work 9 hour days - a 45 hour work week. It didn't last but two weeks - it was leaked to the local newspaper (I looked and can't find it - it was in the 80s). Today - people dream of 45 hour work weeks. Well - you know how that went - there is no more Hughes Aircraft to speak of anymore.

So business, and business controled media, are screaming, "We can't afford overtime" - hire more people, no overtime, less stress for everyone, engaged and productive (not just busy and scattered) employees. I think it's brilliant.

Some facts to review:

This is a big deal. Some 5 million workers will get a raise. (See accompanying video, which we made last month.)

Business lobbies are already hollering this will kill jobs.

That’s what they always predict – whether it’s raising the minimum wage, Obamacare, family and medical leave, or better worker safety.

Yet their predictions never turn out to be true.

In fact, the new rule is likely to increase the number of jobs. That’s because employers who don’t want to pay overtime have an obvious option: They can hire more workers and employ each of them for no more than 40 hours a week.

It’s high time for this change.

When the overtime threshold was at its peak a half-century ago, more than 60 percent of salaried workers qualified for overtime pay. But inflation has eroded that old threshold. Today, only about 8 percent of salaried workers qualify.

And these will be - local and solid middle class jobs.

robertreich.org...

Watch the associated video - Reich gives good presentation.

Rolling blog - post date is June 30, 2015.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Good that there has been an adjustment to "salary" for OT

This doesn't really fit into the model but I believe the new scheme is to split every job into two so we can employ people.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
You've probably heard that the administration has raised the overtime limit for exempt salaried employees from roughtly 22K to 50K. The threshold has only had a small bump in level during the last 39 years.

www.usatoday.com...

My first - good job - was a non-exempt salaried job with a Union Aerospace Firm. We occassionly worked overtime, largely when a RFP (Request for Proposal - the Federal Government used to encourage competition and didn't just hand out contracts to 'friends') was due. Mostly we worked our 40 hours and enjoyed a pleasant but by no means comfortable life. When we got more work - we hired more happy people, that worked hard for their 40 hours and everyone - everyone prospered.

It all changed.... and I was there when another company (I guess I should name names here really - General Motors) bought the company I worked for, Hughes Aircraft, and decreed that all non-exempt employees would always work 9 hour days - a 45 hour work week. It didn't last but two weeks - it was leaked to the local newspaper (I looked and can't find it - it was in the 80s). Today - people dream of 45 hour work weeks. Well - you know how that went - there is no more Hughes Aircraft to speak of anymore.

So business, and business controled media, are screaming, "We can't afford overtime" - hire more people, no overtime, less stress for everyone, engaged and productive (not just busy and scattered) employees. I think it's brilliant.

Some facts to review:

This is a big deal. Some 5 million workers will get a raise. (See accompanying video, which we made last month.)

Business lobbies are already hollering this will kill jobs.

That’s what they always predict – whether it’s raising the minimum wage, Obamacare, family and medical leave, or better worker safety.

Yet their predictions never turn out to be true.

In fact, the new rule is likely to increase the number of jobs. That’s because employers who don’t want to pay overtime have an obvious option: They can hire more workers and employ each of them for no more than 40 hours a week.

It’s high time for this change.

When the overtime threshold was at its peak a half-century ago, more than 60 percent of salaried workers qualified for overtime pay. But inflation has eroded that old threshold. Today, only about 8 percent of salaried workers qualify.

And these will be - local and solid middle class jobs.

robertreich.org...

Rolling blog - post date is June 30, 2015.

These things almost never workout the way the policy wonks think they will. Where my brother works, his boss said that they might just lower everyone's salary; put them on a 30 hour week and when overtime is needed, hire contractors from the labor pool at minimum wage.

BTW, Robert Reich is hardly an independent thinking, non-partisan free world thinker.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: FyreByrd

Good that there has been an adjustment to "salary" for OT

This doesn't really fit into the model but I believe the new scheme is to split every job into two so we can employ people.

You mean the 'old' scheme of a 40 hour work week, I think.

originally posted by: TonyS

These things almost never workout the way the policy wonks think they will. Where my brother works, his boss said that they might just lower everyone's salary; put them on a 30 hour week and when overtime is needed, hire contractors from the labor pool at minimum wage.

BTW, Robert Reich is hardly an independent thinking, non-partisan free world thinker.

Well this one has, in the past, BSR (that's Before St. Ronnie), for millions of US workers. It was the 'policy' during the post war middle class boom years.

Mr. Reich has facts and experince behind his assertions.

a reply to: FyreByrd



OP could you explain how companies that are already on the edge of failure having to put out more money is good for the economy........This will reduce jobs and that is the cold hard truth. And before you say it is the right thing to do.......I agree. But the economy is fragile and companies are right on the edge. Times are really bad in 2015 and truth be told we could see another collapse later this year.



If the president really wanted to create jobs he would just keep his word........Remember back when the economy crashed in 2008-2009.......They promised huge construction projects across the country........Remember. This never happened and our country is crumbling apart. The banks received the money not the people.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: FyreByrd

Good that there has been an adjustment to "salary" for OT

This doesn't really fit into the model but I believe the new scheme is to split every job into two so we can employ people.

You mean the 'old' scheme of a 40 hour work week, I think.

Actually kind of. I expect the next step is to classify "full time" as 30 hours (see Obamacare) a week (OT after 30) in order to artificially create more jobs. Thus compound our issue with exporting jobs to other countries as a negative consequence.

And of course, many employers would respond by making current 40 hour a week jobs into two 20 hour a week part time jobs if possible.

Yay, more jobs!

LOL

This is all well and good for people in that salary trap.

But it could easily put pressure on the hourly pay scales.

All that hype about raising minimum wage jobs.

Now just who will pay for the extra "salaries".

a reply to: FyreByrd

Blaming Reagan won't cut the mustard.

Reagan's Administration was marginalized and infiltrated the day he was shot and wounded.

He was actually only the "President" for 69 days.

Labor "friendly" Presidents and Congresses have come and gone already without doing much of anything.

originally posted by: SubTruth
a reply to: FyreByrd



OP could you explain how companies that are already on the edge of failure having to put out more money is good for the economy........This will reduce jobs and that is the cold hard truth. And before you say it is the right thing to do.......I agree. But the economy is fragile and companies are right on the edge. Times are really bad in 2015 and truth be told we could see another collapse later this year.



If the president really wanted to create jobs he would just keep his word........Remember back when the economy crashed in 2008-2009.......They promised huge construction projects across the country........Remember. This never happened and our country is crumbling apart. The banks received the money not the people.

This is called wage theft.

It will create more jobs. And living wage jobs.

Please get your facts straight.

At least watch the video.

Companies aren't failing they are making huge profits. Small well run companies are as well.

The businesses you speak of, I think, are the little contractor businesses that are little more then a source of income for the 'owner', who is often stealing from their own employees, cheating on their taxes. They won't change. They won't change a thing about how they 'compensate' their workers.

Just because what you wanted - free money from the labor of others - doesn't mean that business is going to fail on the account of compensating their employees fairly.

It's not about you - it's about what is best for the most people. Maybe it's time to find your own 40 hour a week job for a well run in-compliance company. I know several in the Trades. And they pay hourly and do pay proper overtime and worker's comp and insurance and disablity and even provide profit-sharing and 401K plans to their workers - and in non-union shops.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: FyreByrd

Blaming Reagan won't cut the mustard.

Reagan's Administration was marginalized and infiltrated the day he was shot and wounded.

He was actually only the "President" for 69 days.

Labor "friendly" Presidents and Congresses have come and gone already without doing much of anything.

But - it's the pivotal point in time and just plain fun. He personally stood for nothing and did whatever and said whatever he was told to - the perfect corporate politican. He's a symbol.

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: FyreByrd

Good that there has been an adjustment to "salary" for OT

This doesn't really fit into the model but I believe the new scheme is to split every job into two so we can employ people.

You mean the 'old' scheme of a 40 hour work week, I think.

Actually kind of. I expect the next step is to classify "full time" as 30 hours (see Obamacare) a week (OT after 30) in order to artificially create more jobs. Thus compound our issue with exporting jobs to other countries as a negative consequence.

And of course, many employers would respond by making current 40 hour a week jobs into two 20 hour a week part time jobs if possible.

Yay, more jobs!

LOL

Do you have 'any idea' at all what you are talking about. No. I didn't think so.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: infolurker

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: FyreByrd

Good that there has been an adjustment to "salary" for OT

This doesn't really fit into the model but I believe the new scheme is to split every job into two so we can employ people.

You mean the 'old' scheme of a 40 hour work week, I think.

Actually kind of. I expect the next step is to classify "full time" as 30 hours (see Obamacare) a week (OT after 30) in order to artificially create more jobs. Thus compound our issue with exporting jobs to other countries as a negative consequence.

And of course, many employers would respond by making current 40 hour a week jobs into two 20 hour a week part time jobs if possible.

Yay, more jobs!

LOL

Do you have 'any idea' at all what you are talking about. No. I didn't think so.

Oh yes, I know exactly what I am talking about. The new scheme will redefine full time to 30 hours so we can "create jobs". Not a difficult concept. Turn 40 hour a week jobs into more jobs with less hours (And less pay.. YAY).

smallbiztrends.com...

www.nytimes.com...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu...

I almost got excited, then realized it doesn't affect me, so i will just keep working my 60+ hours weeks with no OT.

Who ever designed the work week was some sort of sadistic bastard.

Let's see ... we created just under 250,000 jobs. Then I realized that about 92,000,000 Americans are out of the workforce. We have a labor force participation rate of only 62%. It hasn't been that low since '77 and the Carter years.

originally posted by: tnhiker
I almost got excited, then realized it doesn't affect me, so i will just keep working my 60+ hours weeks with no OT.

Who ever designed the work week was some sort of sadistic bastard.

It will not benefit me either sadly however I don't wish others harm just because of it. I have trouble understanding, and I'm speaking in general terms not about you specifically, why people can't be happy for others good fortune. It's a tough one for me. How some will tear down any improvement in working conditions for others - if they don't 'get theirs'.

It's a sad state of affairs.

originally posted by: infolurker


Actually kind of. I expect the next step is to classify "full time" as 30 hours (see Obamacare) a week (OT after 30) in order to artificially create more jobs. Thus compound our issue with exporting jobs to other countries as a negative consequence.

And of course, many employers would respond by making current 40 hour a week jobs into two 20 hour a week part time jobs if possible.

Yay, more jobs!

LOL

Oh yes, I know exactly what I am talking about. The new scheme will redefine full time to 30 hours so we can "create jobs". Not a difficult concept. Turn 40 hour a week jobs into more jobs with less hours (And less pay.. YAY).

smallbiztrends.com...

www.nytimes.com...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu...

First of all this doesn't have any effect on the overtime threshold change that is being made now!!!.

Second, this is a discussion taking place, there is no pending legislation - so it isn't a fact.

Third, this would be a bad thing? How exactly. It would put more people to work. It would increase productivity?

Fourth - what is your objection to the Salaried Exempt Threshold? You're objection was about the above 'discussion' which is not relevant in today's reality and may never come to be relevant. And then - why would a standard thirty hour a week - with a LIVING wage be a bad thing for the working class?

a reply to: FyreByrd

You asked, I provided.

Don't think for a second if your work week goes from 40 to 30 hours that you won't take a 25% pay cut.. LOL

No objection to the Salary / OT change at all.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: FyreByrd

You asked, I provided.

Don't think for a second if your work week goes from 40 to 30 hours that you won't take a 25% pay cut.. LOL

No objection to the Salary / OT change at all.

Again not relevant to the subject at hand.

Nor facts - just speculation and discussion of possibilities.

Don't believe everything you think.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

Don't believe everything you think.

I will have to think about that !!