Bush Pushes for Changes in Labor Laws

[Nambe]

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP)

President Bush on Thursday pressed for changes in labor laws so that workers can choose time off instead of overtime pay, a notion that has met stiff resistance in the Republican-controlled Congress. ..

The AFL-CIO and other opponents say the proposals will hurt workers financially while savings companies billions on overtime pay. ..

Labor unions say companies don't need a change in federal law to schedule workers to work a late shift or allow them to come in late one day to accommodate family needs.

Bush favors the business community argument that the workplace has been transformed because of two-parent working families and that family time is precious. ..

Ride Don’t Drive It’s Global Cool

[cthrumatrix]

1. less pay.....hmmm...who does that favor?

[newscaster]

3. Since when have employers ever.....

been concerned about family togetherness. What a crock.
They cut overtime pay, don't grant real vacation time. One week a year is bogus and when the employees seek to unionize....we all know what they do then.
Good God, Bush is a freaking disaster on legs.

[newscaster]

4. What about a bill in Congress

to Put the Presidency on an hourly pay basis and vacation time being granted only after you have been there at least two years to qualify for one week. Ya think Shrub would like that?

[MichiganVote]

2. Well George given your money BS, overtime has become precious too

[Nite Owl]

5. He really doesn't get it.

People have to work overtime because they need the money for the bills, to pay the higher gas prices and increases in health care. And that's why we have so many two parent working families.

[Tardisian]

6. I just read this on Yahoo....

and Oooh! Grrr.

Just asked hubby which he would choose, and he looked at me as if I was nuts. Said if he did overtime, he'd want money for it, and he thinks that employers offering more time off to be with family sounds like they'd be guilt-tripping parents who have to deal with paying bills.

<stomping around, calling * filthy names>

[Kool Kitty]

7. Gee, I would bet he didn't announce this to the

crowds he's been speaking to on the campaign trail.

[TankLV]

8. We all have that now - it's called "comp time off"

And we can't even use THAT!

The last time I tried to take off for an emergency or other reason, it was met with stiff opposition and given only grudgingly.

I've built up so much comp time and vacation time that I'll never be able to use it.

And, if I don't use it within 2 years, I loose it all - it doesnt' build-up forever.

These shits never worked as an employee a single day in their life and don't have a clue.

[Samurai_Writer]

9. Comp time is a joke

Nearly everyone I know (including me) who worked at a company who had 'comp time' never got to take it. There was always some deadline or emergency where it was imperative they worked whenever they requested to use their accrued comp time. And we are not talking about "I want to take a week of for comp time". It was more like "Can I take Friday afternoon off and use my comp time?" Answer: No.

[TahitiNut]

10. "Comp Time" isn't time-and-a-half ... and is delayed if taken at all

This is a scam. Fair-minded people get a superficial impression that this is a fair trade. It's not. It's an hour's "pay" for an hour's overtime. Right away the employer saves 33% - and then delays paying it. The employer presents obstacles to the employee attempting to schedule comp time. Try to take it around a holiday? The employer claims they're already short-handed. The longer it takes to receive comp time, then the longer the employer avoids realizing the expense and the longer the employee waits until actually getting compensation.

As far as I'm concerned, the regular work week should be shortened to 36 hours and all overtime paid at double the hourly rate. Everyone in a business who doesn't have authority for a budget and signature authority (final approval) for some level of spending should be compensated, by law, for overtime.

Let's STOP devaluing labor! All wealth comes from labor and labor alone.

[sandnsea]

11. What happened to "personal days"

Do y'all not get personal days anymore? I've been self-employed for so long, I don't really know how bad they're screwing everybody. What do you need comp time for if you still get personal days?

[TahitiNut]

12. The typical employer today ...

... offers a "bucket" of personal/medical/childcare days on top of vacation time, the only difference being that vacation is usually scheduled in advance and rolls over from year to year to some extent. (Personal days ususally don't roll over. Use 'em or lose 'em.) Once an employee has used up time for illness or emergencies, the time is no longer compensated. The time, during the first 3-4 years, isn't even enough for an average hospitalization. Imagine coming down with acute appendicitis and finding out you don't even get paid for the last few days ... on top of the medical bills your health insurance doesn't cover. Then imagine recalling the many, many hours and weekends you spent working uncompensated overtime! Been there. Done that.

[sandnsea]

13. Me too

That's why I quit doing it. My point, though, is that if you add up personal days, sick days, and vacation time; you usually have enough to cover most minor situations. Minor being not catastrophic, like a 3 month recovery from an illness or something. There's no benefit to this comp time if people are being treated fairly to start with. Salaried workers, on the other hand, have always been screwed. How secretaries ever got classified as salaried workers is beyond me, but I've been there too many times to ever willingly do it again.

[quaker bill]

15. Not all salaried workers have this problem

It depends on the salary and the employer. I am well paid and rarely put in more than a couple of hours extra a week.

I agree with you on the secretarial bit though. There probably needs to be a requirement that a certain minimum salary be paid before a worker becomes overtime exempt. Secretarial positions do not typically meet what I would consider a reasonable minimum standard for exemption from the overtime requirement.

[TahitiNut]

17. "salaried" has never wholly been the determinant of "Exempt"

... where "exempt" means "exempt from the Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA)." Yes, there was a high salary level (executive/professional) where the tests for exemption were made briefer, but salary merely abbreviated the criteria.

Up until BushDimSonSmirk, "exempt" generally meant someone in a policy-making managerial or supervisory role. While there were specific exemptions for narrow catgories of workers (like family in a family-owned business or farm), it was intended to identify those whose influence over their own duties and tenure were significant and influence over the business practices were material.

Under BushDimSonSmirk, there are vast, new classes of labor consigned to the 'slave' category (i.e. 'exempt' but without authority) ... http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/fedreg/proposed/2003033101.htm

[poliguru]

18. Is he even referring to salaried workers?

In my experience, salaried workers don't get paid for overtime, only hourly. And as the guy said in the article, companies don't need permission from the government to move hours around. But those hours taken off, as noted, are unpaid.

So basically, Bush is trying to look like he has a plan when he doesn't.

[quaker bill]

14. This is just another way to present the previous proposal

They have been trying to get the right to overtime pay loosened for about a year now. This is just another spin on the same proposal. Many people count on overtime pay just to make ends meet.

If the repugs were truly concerned about families, they would increase the minimum wage as that creates upward pressure for wages not only at the minimum but for some distance above it. Contrary to repug predictions, experience when the Clinton administration raised the minimum wage demonstrated that such an increase caused few if any people to lose their jobs.

Secondly if the concern is that people are spending too much time at work, they should increase the overtime premium to something like 2 times the regular hourly rate. This would create a disincentive to managers scheduling projects in a manner that results in extensive overtime and likely would result in hiring a larger staff to accomplish the same work and prevent excess OT. It could help with the unemployment problem.

Another consideration would be to create a higher minimum standard for paid leave. Americans work more hours and take less leave than the average worker in most industrialized economies.

More people working fewer hours at a higher rate of pay would be the best way to address the "family time" problem

[TahitiNut]

19. "More people working fewer hours at a higher rate of pay..."

Absolutely! We should have an immediate reduction to a 36-hour (4x9, 2x12, 6x6, or 4.5x8) work-week, with double-time for overtime. We should also have a 20-hour lid on "part-time" and a minimum wage of $7.25/hour. Immediately. The rules for 'exemption' should be strictly limited instead of "liberalized." (There ain't nothing "liberal" about what they've been doing to gut FLSA!)

Furthermore, "out-sourcing" should be AXED ... with people who spend over 90% of their working hours over a 3-month period working for a single employer/service-recipient required to be directly employed by that employer. Screw these specious, exploitative "body shops"!! (I'm talking about companies with over 50 employees, not someone running a household.)

[0007]

16. Why do they always want to fuck with the worker and 'ya never

heard a goddamn word about all the vice presidents and CEO's these companies have and the money they make?

[elehhhhna]

20. Get a lawyer.. If you took comp time but qualified for OT pay,

you can still get it.

Retroactively.

[sandraj]

21. So is he going at this from a different angle now?

As if it's a "worker's choice" issue now rather than employer determined, like the bill that was just defeated?

Maybe this is his way of doing an end run around the exempt vs. non-exempt issue.

"I think the government ought to allow employers to say to an employee `If you take some time off and work different hours, you're allowed to do so — if you want to accumulate time to spend with your families, spend with your parents, spend for being re-educated, you're allowed to do so,'" Bush said."

"And there's this bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn," Bush continued. "Any takers?"

[Beetwasher]

22. I'm Very Happy He's Doing This

People are going to hear this and go WTF?? I don't necessarily need more time off, but I DEFINITELY need MORE MONEY.

This will hurt him that he's fucking w/ this...

[54anickel]

23. Isn't this where he started from? This came before the whole argument

on redefining an exempt employee. I remember getting lots of e-mails and action alerts on this proposal long before the OT movement.

[alarimer]

24. I thought they already did this.

or was it shot down by Congress earlier? I thought the Labor Department was all set to change the rules as to who was exempt and non-exempt. Personally I am not sure how this would affect me at my current job. I work for the state (Texas) and my department does not pay overtime. We do get comp time and we do get to use it (in fact my bosses REQUIRE me to take it and keep the balance low because I will lose it after a certain amount of time). You can accrue annual leave (vacation). How much you get and how much you can carry per year depends on how lonw you have been there. I get 10 hours vacation per month and can carry 200+ hours over. If you have more, it converts to sick leave so you don't lose it exactly. I am considered non-exempt even though I am salaried (I get paid the same if I work 160 hours per month, 180, 140 whatever). My position is technical, not professional or managerial. I get accrue comp time at time and a half and I can use as much as I accrue. Exempt employees only get straight time comp time and can only use a certain amount per year. I consider myself lucky in that, although the pay is low, my bosses are very fair and decent people and would never cheat me of any of my time off. I can't say the same thing for the entire organization but at least my little corner of it is okay.
I think these proposed changes are very bad for working people because I know that many companies would take advantage of their employess given a chance. We really need to protect workers' rights, not corporations' rights.