PTO instead of paid OT?

[thereisnospoon]

If it is compensation for hourly workers, then 12 hours comp for 8 hours of overtime.

Now who is being greedy?
If your idea is mandated, guess what happens to overtime for most people? GONE!

How is that greedy? Thanks for stopping buy and showing us what the real intent of the GOP is: to screw employees.

Not political party. Business.
Both parties benefit from comp PTO.....Each has a lower tax burden.

 

[thereisnospoon]

GOP seeks alternative to overtime pay

WASHINGTON (AP) — It seems like a simple proposition: give employees who work more than 40 hours a week the option of taking paid time off instead of overtime pay.

The choice already exists in the public sector. Federal and state workers can save earned time off and use it weeks or even months later to attend a parent-teacher conference, care for an elderly parent or deal with home repairs.

Republicans in Congress are pushing legislation that would extend that option to the private sector. They say that would bring more flexibility to the workplace and help workers better balance family and career.


Sounds like a great option to me. There's times when I don't need the extra money and times when I really NEED some time off. Being a divorced dad, I miss out on a lot so I think this is a great idea.

You?

If it's an hour and a half of PTO for over hour of OT, then I'm okay with it. If it's hour for hour match, then forget it. Bosses need to get their tightwad checkbooks out and start paying for their labor.

Yeah no shit. People depend on OT pay.

WHAT?!! Only idiots depend on Overtime and bonuses.
Idiots who live beyond their means.

 

[Sallow]

Bullshit. I know in teachers unions if you dont join you still have to pay DUES!! So you are FORCED to join!!!

No you aren't. You're free to seek employment elsewhere.

So if the employer then requires you to join and donate to his charity or club, you are ok with that.. because you can find work elsewhere??

I think we know the answer to that.. because then it is the 'evil owner'... but it is all OK when it is the union dictating it

Um..there's plenty of stuff like that, that goes on.

Additionally, you can be fired for almost any reason, no matter what you do or how much time you've put in.

 

[Sallow]

Now who is being greedy?
If your idea is mandated, guess what happens to overtime for most people? GONE!

How is that greedy? Thanks for stopping buy and showing us what the real intent of the GOP is: to screw employees.

Not political party. Business.
Both parties benefit from comp PTO.....Each has a lower tax burden.

No they don't.

And the employer can dictate when it is used. Which means you can be fired before you get it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

All employers need.

Another way to abuse employers.

Because they don't have enough of those, really.

Oh please.

 

[Katzndogz]

When an employee fucks off during the workday thinking they can make money by working over time to complete what they should have been able to complete during the work day it is time to fire them for wanting to be paid overtime.

WTF.....

Oh please. They do it every day, they wander around, talk to their friends chat on the phone and surf the web. When 5 o'clock comes they realize how much they haven't done and ask for overtime to actually do it.

 

[Sallow]

If it's an hour and a half of PTO for over hour of OT, then I'm okay with it. If it's hour for hour match, then forget it. Bosses need to get their tightwad checkbooks out and start paying for their labor.

No, its not time and a half, its an hour for an hour

It is an incentive for employers to pressure their employees to take PTO instead of OT

You people are uninformed.
Just as the employee must pay payroll taxes, income taxes and other deductions, so must the employer.
The PTO is a MUCH better option because each party pays LESS to those greedy bastards in the respective state capitols and in Washington.
Who would not want to get a full day off with pay for each 8 hrs of OT. I sure as hell would. What's better, there is an option to bank a certain number of days. I am all over that.

Says the guy in the Union working on the public dime.

 

[Againsheila]

That is between the company and the employee, IMHO...

My company offers comp time... I take advantage of it... it is generally 1 for 1 hours.. but then again, I am salary... I could see a different company policy for hourly employees, but I don't see the company being FORCED to give 1.5 hours.. the extra time off to bank is a luxury in itself... in a job that you only get 2 or 1 weeks vacation, I can see the benefit of banking up a month or more of PTO

My husband has been working at Boeing for more than 25 years. Because of overtime, he gets like almost 4 weeks a year off, but they won't let him take it in a row. IMO, forget it, it's just another take away. They'll say you get to use the time, but they'll come up with a reason why you can't. (I.E. you only get to take that time off when we have nothing for you to do, if we are busy, forget it, it's not for your convenience, it's for the employers convenience.

 

[Katzndogz]

Is there any reason why any business should operate at the employees convenience? It's always going to be at the employers convenience.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah no shit. People depend on OT pay.

That is like people depending on 'bonuses'... it is fucking STUPID... the ONLY thing you can 'count' on is the base that you are guaranteed if you live up to the employment agreement.. anything above and beyond that is dependent on many factors out of your control

Wrong. Lots of jobs involve OT as a regular part of the job, from petrochemical plant shift workers to convenience store cashiers. Hey try working a 40 hour week on a tug boat, see how that works out for ya. You're a fucking idiot.

Holy shit...
This silly song.
Ok, let's look at it from the other angle.
If a person is hired with the knowledge that OT is required, so be it. The employee is duly compensated.
Now, if there is a reduction in hours to 40 for whatever reason, the employee is not owed for anything more than hours worked.
Happens all the time. I worked at a firm where we were very busy. The hiring mgr told me that OT was required. Once things stabilized all OT was gone. So what? Anyone who spent their pay as though OT would never come to an end. That's their problem.
Not that this has a thing to do with PTO vs OT pay.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Wrong. Lots of jobs involve OT as a regular part of the job, from petrochemical plant shift workers to convenience store cashiers. Hey try working a 40 hour week on a tug boat, see how that works out for ya. You're a fucking idiot.

Wrong.. unless it is specifically written in the contract of employment and compensation, you cannot count on it.. no matter what an employer 'says'... business can drop, etc and the employers need to have you work OT can change..

You sir, are the idiot

OK. What's your point? Is it that people who depend on OT pay to make a living don't really depend on it? I'm failing to see what your getting at.

They SHOULD NOT depend on it.
If a worker is counting on OT pay 'to make ends meet', they are either financially inept( spend it as fast as they can get their hands on it). Or they cannot handle their bills.
One should only think about their base pay and live accordingly. Anything above that level of pay is GREAT, but should never be considered as 'regular income'.
I once worked with a divorced woman who only worked part time jobs because she considered her child support payments as "income"...That was one of the most stupid ideas I have ever heard out of a total stranger.

 

[Pogo]

GOP seeks alternative to overtime pay

WASHINGTON (AP) — It seems like a simple proposition: give employees who work more than 40 hours a week the option of taking paid time off instead of overtime pay.

The choice already exists in the public sector. Federal and state workers can save earned time off and use it weeks or even months later to attend a parent-teacher conference, care for an elderly parent or deal with home repairs.

Republicans in Congress are pushing legislation that would extend that option to the private sector. They say that would bring more flexibility to the workplace and help workers better balance family and career.


Sounds like a great option to me. There's times when I don't need the extra money and times when I really NEED some time off. Being a divorced dad, I miss out on a lot so I think this is a great idea.

You?

Really? So that would be "excess money". I wouldn't trumpet that concept around here...

Where's Skull Pilot when you need him?

 

[Sallow]

That is like people depending on 'bonuses'... it is fucking STUPID... the ONLY thing you can 'count' on is the base that you are guaranteed if you live up to the employment agreement.. anything above and beyond that is dependent on many factors out of your control

Wrong. Lots of jobs involve OT as a regular part of the job, from petrochemical plant shift workers to convenience store cashiers. Hey try working a 40 hour week on a tug boat, see how that works out for ya. You're a fucking idiot.

Holy shit...
This silly song.
Ok, let's look at it from the other angle.
If a person is hired with the knowledge that OT is required, so be it. The employee is duly compensated.
Now, if there is a reduction in hours to 40 for whatever reason, the employee is not owed for anything more than hours worked.
Happens all the time. I worked at a firm where we were very busy. The hiring mgr told me that OT was required. Once things stabilized all OT was gone. So what? Anyone who spent their pay as though OT would never come to an end. That's their problem.
Not that this has a thing to do with PTO vs OT pay.

Wait a minute..

Aren't you a NYC police officer?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Bullshit. I know in teachers unions if you dont join you still have to pay DUES!! So you are FORCED to join!!!

No you aren't. You're free to seek employment elsewhere.

So if the employer then requires you to join and donate to his charity or club, you are ok with that.. because you can find work elsewhere??

I'm not OK with it - so I wouldn't seek employment with such an employer. Its called free choice and personal responsibility, something you should look into.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

GOP seeks alternative to overtime pay

WASHINGTON (AP) — It seems like a simple proposition: give employees who work more than 40 hours a week the option of taking paid time off instead of overtime pay.

The choice already exists in the public sector. Federal and state workers can save earned time off and use it weeks or even months later to attend a parent-teacher conference, care for an elderly parent or deal with home repairs.

Republicans in Congress are pushing legislation that would extend that option to the private sector. They say that would bring more flexibility to the workplace and help workers better balance family and career.


Sounds like a great option to me. There's times when I don't need the extra money and times when I really NEED some time off. Being a divorced dad, I miss out on a lot so I think this is a great idea.

You?

The unions hate it, which means it must be great.

Actually, I usually prefer comp time to overtime.

 

[thereisnospoon]

OK. What's your point? Is it that people who depend on OT pay to make a living don't really depend on it? I'm failing to see what your getting at.

The point is you saying people 'depend' on it... and I said it is stupid because it is not guaranteed...

So people who work OT to pay their bills are stupid.

Got it.

And you righties wonder why you can't win the White House.

it would be stupid to budget your life that way and then bitch when the business eliminates or cuts back OT...

Live your life what way exactly? The way of having a roof over your head and food to eat?

The White House?....WTF are you blabbering about.
No one should be looking at 'extra' pay as regular and permanent.
This is why there are so many working people who are broke all the time. They are broke because they refuse to save, cannot balance their bank accounts, Have gotten themselves buried in revolving debt because they bought something(s) they WANTED or bought too much house or vehicles they should have passed by.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Wrong.. unless it is specifically written in the contract of employment and compensation, you cannot count on it.. no matter what an employer 'says'... business can drop, etc and the employers need to have you work OT can change..

You sir, are the idiot

OK. What's your point? Is it that people who depend on OT pay to make a living don't really depend on it? I'm failing to see what your getting at.

They SHOULD NOT depend on it.

I understand you and your ilk think no one should depend on their job to make a living, but millions do.

If a worker is counting on OT pay 'to make ends meet', they are either financially inept( spend it as fast as they can get their hands on it). Or they cannot handle their bills.

So people who work 60 hour weeks to make ends meet are "financially inept" and should instead work only 40 hour weeks so they can't make ends meet. You're a genius.


Do you idiots seriously wonder why the average working guy thinks the Republican party is out of touch? "Hey guy who works 60 hour weeks to take care of his family! Why are you doing that? Just work 40 hour weeks for more money, silly! You're financially inept!"

One should only think about their base pay and live accordingly.

So people should starve their children so they can save 100% of their OT pay. That makes a lot of sense.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Wrong.. unless it is specifically written in the contract of employment...

LOL! "Contract of employment" Any wage job in any so called "right to work" states will have a "contract" of employment which stipulates the employer may terminate the contract at any time they wish. You can't even "count" on 40 hours a week. On the other hand, most union contracts will stipulate precisely the kinds of hours workers will work - be it to ensure overtime pay or to ensure a 40 hour week.

Yeah well that's why labor collectives represent such a low percentage of American workers.
Unions drive up costs be demanding workers get paid for not working. Such as the 40 hour guarantee. That is outrageous and the reason why unions are being kicked out and states are going to right to work.

 

[SuMar]

Some Years ago, I worked for a company that offered the choice of ot pay and comp time. No one had a problem with that.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Wrong.. unless it is specifically written in the contract of employment...

LOL! "Contract of employment" Any wage job in any so called "right to work" states will have a "contract" of employment which stipulates the employer may terminate the contract at any time they wish. You can't even "count" on 40 hours a week. On the other hand, most union contracts will stipulate precisely the kinds of hours workers will work - be it to ensure overtime pay or to ensure a 40 hour week.

Yeah well that's why labor collectives represent such a low percentage of American workers.
Unions drive up costs be demanding workers get paid for not working. Such as the 40 hour guarantee. That is outrageous and the reason why unions are being kicked out and states are going to right to work.

Labor collectives represent a low percentage of union workers because big business has been successful in getting government to squash them. That's why wages are stagnating.