Slashdot Mirror

You should look into the latest regs on whether your position is in fact exempt from overtime pay. Being "salaried" doesn't necessarily mean they don't owe you overtime pay, and the regs (especially related to "computer" jobs) were adjusted a couple years ago to disallow "exempt" status for a lot of positions.

[Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer, but my father is recently retired from practicing labor law, and this is based on what he told me.]

I know it's a joke, but actually, as far as I can tell, they are. In fact, it is probably illegal to salary somebody at $1 per year. In order to qualify for the "executive" or "professional" minimum wage exemptions to Federal minimum wage laws, you have to be salaried at a certain minimum level according to the Department of Labor. Admittedly, this minimum level is only $155 bucks a week, but it's more than $1 per year.

So while the vast majority of salaried professionals are exempt, it would seem that you can't just salary somebody at $1 per year and declare them exempt from minimum wage and overtime laws.

As far as I can see, this can only be legally accomplished by salarying the executive at the minimum level to qualify for minimum wage exemption, giving them checks, and having them refuse to deposit the checks. Or just ignore the law and assume that nobody would be silly enough to enforce it for multi-billionaires. States also have a myriad of laws regulating this stuff.

...actually there are occupational exceptions, as well as exceptions based upon the revenue of a company. That's what I specified, and again, check the Dept of Labor's website if you don't believe me. http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

Link to Ohio minimum wage law, here. Forgot to include it in the post.

ThinWhiteDuke: minimum wage [...] $3 per hour

http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

Let's see here...

http://www.boysschoolscoalition.org/
http://www.ncgs.org/
http://www.scouting.org/
http://www.girlscouts.org/

Information on the discrimination areas you're thinking of...
http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm

Finally, an excerpt which is the most relevant part of this entire discussion:

"...subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance..."

Private schools, clubs, groups - the first amendment is not relevant to such entities.

You're joking, right?

Let's do the math. We'll say $50K is the "great" salary you reference. And minimum wage is $5.15 in most states (http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm). My calculator tells me that to work for twice minimum wage ($10.30), you'd work 4,854 hours per year. Dividing that into 52 weeks (neglecting holidays, vacation, etc...) gives me 93 hours per week, consistently. Heck, I suppose if I calculate overtime rates over 40 hours I could shave 10 hours or so off the weekly total.

Your point has some merit, in that many companies are pushing fewer employees to do more, but your example is flawed to the extreme. Unions were valid in changing life-threatening working conditions, but have become as bloated and inefficient as the massive corporations they fought. The day my industry unionizes, and I find that my contract negotiated job description doesn't allow me to plug in a network cable in a server, is the day I turn to my dream job of professional non-unionized athlete (http://www.ifoce.com/index.php).

The workplace is not considered a strictly private place if you have employees. Here's the text from the US Department of Labor (http://www.dol.gov/opa/aboutdol/lawsprog.htm):

The Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act is administered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Safety and health conditions in most private industries are regulated by OSHA or OSHA-approved state programs, which also cover public sector employers. Employers covered by the OSH Act must comply with the regulations and the safety and health standards promulgated by OSHA. Employers also have a general duty under the OSH Act to provide their employees with work and a workplace free from recognized, serious hazards. OSHA enforces the Act through workplace inspections and investigations....

Perhaps in your idealized libertarian-capitalist world of "private property", the United States ends where your property line begins, but that's not reality. The fact that a person works on private property doesn't mean that the worker's body belongs to the property owner.

If you wish to smoke in your own office, that's okay. If you and your business partner wish to smoke, that's cool too. Nobody is going to rat anyone out. If you start hiring people, then you're subject to labor laws.

Also, I think there's no question about the hazards of prolonged exposure to second-hand smoke. It's not any different from any other burning material. It contains soot and VOCs (plus all the chemicals the surgeon general likes to list). It's not good for your health if you're exposed to it for eight hours a day. I'm not an anti-smoking advocate in the least. I have smoked and can smoke. I've smoked everything from cigars to things that aren't tobacco. I just agree with the general idea that it's unhealthy to be exposed to smoke for long periods of time, and that workers are entitled to work in a smoke-free environment to protect their health.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay /fs17a_overview.htm

It appears the minimum pay for an exempt employee is $23,660/year.

I don't have a direct link, because I found this out myself reading a bunch of raw data from http://www.dol.gov/ and http://www.census.gov/. The 30% is a pull-out-of-my-ass number, the actual decrease was from $35k/year median salary to $26k/year median salary. Since you challenged me- this is a $9000 decrease, which actually makes it 25.714285714285714285714285714286%, so a bit better than I thought. Thank you.

You don't believe Amnesty International? Fine. What about Abu Ghraib?

You didn't like my citation for the patriot act? I linked you to the Library of Congress. Fine, perhaps you wanted me to be more specific. I refer you to really all of Title II (Enhanced Surveillance Procedures), specificaly Sect. 201 (Authority to intercept wire, oral, and electronic communications relating to terrorism) and Sec. 213 (Authority for delaying notice of the execution of a warrant)

You didn't like the Wikipedia article on the Drug War? I tried wikipedia to give a general overview of how wasteful and invasive it is, but tak a good look at the US Department of Labor Drug Regulations to see just how much your employer is allowed to drug test you.

Check my constitution? Well I don't know about yours, the first Amedment of mine starts out with "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". So my commander-in-chief endorsing religion using government resources sure feels like its breaking the spirit of the law right in half.

If you want to call my reference to the widening economic gap a stretch, fine. But I do suggest a history lesson on the age of the American Robber Barons.

I don't know what else to say if you don't like these sources. Its easy for you to repeat "cite" or just ignore sources who don't share your viewpoint, but it's unhelpful. If you're not satisfied, perhaps you could disprove my original point that Americans are moving backwards in regards to civil liberties?

In other words, if you disagree, how can you prove to me that America has aggressivley maintained or improved liberties since the civil rights movement?

I'm afraid you are simply incorrect about labor laws not applying at all. Among other conditions for a computer related job to be declared exempt, here's a quote from the US Department of Labor website's computer related ocupations page:

The employee must be compensated either on a salary or fee basis at a rate not less than $455 per week or, if compensated on an hourly basis, at a rate not less than $27.63 an hour

I'm thinking you missed something in school if you don't realize that you're protected by some labor laws even as a software engineer - or you're still in school.

And what if European contries did the same thing? I have no problem with a European country refusing to import goods manufactured at less than their minimum wage, that would certainly result in lower unemployment in Europe - as Europe is suffering from the same offshoring problems we're having in the US. Of course, you're incorrect about German unemployment anyway - according to the German Federal Foreign Office website, unemployment is currently at 9.8%, and at 7.6% if you only look at the former West Germany. High, but not double digit. France is barely in double digits at 10.1%, according to the CIA World Factbook.

And Silicon Valley having import restrictions is a rediculous arguement - There's this little thing known as the "interstate commerce clause" in the US constitution prohibiting states from imposing import tarrifs and production regulations on goods manufactured in other states. Silicon Valley employees also have the right to relocate to the Southeast without needing government permission, and would likely be able to maintain a higher standard of living if they did so, even at the somewhat lower wages in the Southeast.

In the real world, offshoring has destroyed American jobs, not saved them. It has a snowball effect that is currently accellerating, and can only be stopped by government action making it less cost effective to relocate jobs out of the US. Trying to wait on the Indian and Chinese economies to grow while allowing unrestricted offshoring will only result in massive American unemployment in the next 50 - 100 years.

The few markets opened are tiny compared to the number and value of jobs lost - which I've seen estimated at between 200,000 and 1 million.

Some of August's statistics are at the bottom. Hit "Search" near the top right hand corner for more complete, year-over-year, statistics.

It takes some digging, but you'll better able to debate economics with something better than blind ideology.

These ladies aren't starvin to death. They make minimum wage. When I worked for minimum wage, I wasn't lucky enough to have a job that society deemed tipworthy.

I pay tips with cash whenever possible, so there's no way for the management to track it.

God YES. If you want the money to go to the staff who you're trying to reward with your tip, you give them cash, and do it quietly. If you just want to line their managers' pockets even further, go ahead and use your card.

See this if you don't believe me. Federal minimum wage is about $5/hr, except for employees who receive tips, in which case the employer can cut the "direct" wage as low as two fucking dollars an hour. They have to actually pay them the $5/hour, of course, but by making $3 of each $5 come out of tips, they basically make sure that the employee isn't actually going to benefit at all from your generosity - unless you're an unusually high tipper, they're just going to get $5/hr whether you tip them or not.

Nice one, government. Way to motivate low earners.

In the end, the major cost saving for companies is *not* the lower salary (as you claim fast food workers in the US get), but about the *Exchange Rate*.

No, lowered salaries is the major cost savings. Companies can pay $10,000 for work that would otherwise cost $50,000. I'm sorry, but no exchange rate will save $40,000.

The sad thing is that your lower cost of living has deluded you into thinking that $10,000 is actually good money for what you do. You're doing work that would otherwise earn $50,000. In essence, you are getting ripped off by $40,000 that should be yours, whether your cost of living is lower or not.

On a side note, fast-food McDonalds workers make at least the minimum wage of $7.35 per hour here in Washington State, USA. That's about $15,000 per year for full time work. So yes, our fast food workers make more than you.

"I would hire 20,000 temporary staff for a period of 5-15 years, without ever offering to hire them on permanently. Then, I would issue each of them a teaspoon and canoe. These would be deducted from their first paycheck of course, at full retail price"

Why should the richest people in America pay taxes, when they can just hire "personal Websters" to surf the Net for them, and pay their taxes out of their minimum wages? Or just save that extra markup by outsourcing the Internet work to India? All the government does is stop rich people from making money. Why should they pay for it, when they can pay much less in campaign bribes^Wcontributions, to keep the little people in line, at their own expense?

Lots of employers make their employees take drug tests as part of the hiring process and some of them even subject their employees to drug tests during their employment. Usually, such practices are justified as being required by the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988. But, such justifications are false. All the DFWA requires are drug awareness programs, and the definition of such a program is almost entirely left up to the employer, they can be as simple as handing out dilbert anti-drug pamphlets to new employees.

How is this connected to software piracy at lan parties?
It is advice via analogy.

Do as the smart companies do with respect to drugs. Formulate a policy forbidding piracy, hand out a pamphlet of piracy boojums and then don't worry about it unless somone actively brings an act of piracy to your attention. You will have covered your ass, which is all any organization outside of the BSA and SPAA needs to do, and at the same time wasted as few of the precious non-profit resources on fighting someone else's battle.

Quite frankly, looking at it from a historical perspective, you are wrong. That's the history of the minimum wage and this is the historical statistics for inflation. Notice the extremely low level of correlation.

Yes we have minimum wage. The employee needs to complain, afaik. http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/wages/minimumwage.htm

You know this used to be true and I was looking over it again when the other article came out yesterday.

It is no longer true!

OT pay exclusions for IT people (basically anyone who programs, tests or maintains computers or software), have changed radically in the last few years.

It used to be you had to make more than 53K a year, hourly or salary to be excluded from OT pay.

Now it is much different. Now they are not required to pay OT on a salaried position if you make more than $455/week a low $23K/year. Shit, they don't even have to pay OT if you make more than $27.63 hourly.

This from FairPay Fact Sheet by Exemption Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

To qualify for exemption, employees generally must meet certain tests regarding their job duties and be paid on a salary basis at not less than $455 per week. Job titles do not determine exempt status.

And this from the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

(17)71any employee who is a computer systems
analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or
other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is --
(A) the application of systems analysis techniques
and procedures, including consulting with
users, to determine hardware, software, or system
functional specifications;
(B) the design, development, documentation,
analysis, creation, testing, or modification of
computer systems or programs, including prototypes,
based on and related to user or system
design specifications;
(C) the design, documentation, testing, creation,
or modification of computer programs related
to machine operating systems; or
(D) a combination of duties described in
sub-paragraphs (A), (B), and (C) the performance
of which requires the same level of skills, and
who, in the case of an employee who is compensated
on an hourly basis, is compensated at a rate of not
less than $27.63 an hour.

You know this used to be true and I was looking over it again when the other article came out yesterday.

It is no longer true!

OT pay exclusions for IT people (basically anyone who programs, tests or maintains computers or software), have changed radically in the last few years.

It used to be you had to make more than 53K a year, hourly or salary to be excluded from OT pay.

Now it is much different. Now they are not required to pay OT on a salaried position if you make more than $455/week a low $23K/year. Shit, they don't even have to pay OT if you make more than $27.63 hourly.

This from FairPay Fact Sheet by Exemption Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

To qualify for exemption, employees generally must meet certain tests regarding their job duties and be paid on a salary basis at not less than $455 per week. Job titles do not determine exempt status.

And this from the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

(17)71any employee who is a computer systems
analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or
other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is --
(A) the application of systems analysis techniques
and procedures, including consulting with
users, to determine hardware, software, or system
functional specifications;
(B) the design, development, documentation,
analysis, creation, testing, or modification of
computer systems or programs, including prototypes,
based on and related to user or system
design specifications;
(C) the design, documentation, testing, creation,
or modification of computer programs related
to machine operating systems; or
(D) a combination of duties described in
sub-paragraphs (A), (B), and (C) the performance
of which requires the same level of skills, and
who, in the case of an employee who is compensated
on an hourly basis, is compensated at a rate of not
less than $27.63 an hour.

I don't know where everyone is getting their information on the requirements for "exempt" status, but I was actually researching this the other day and I stumbled across this. It is the Fair Labor Standards Act fact sheet. It states that "Exempt computer employees may be paid at least $455 on a salary basis or on an hourly basis at a rate not less than $27.63 an hour."

Also interesting is "Being paid on a "salary basis" means an employee regularly receives a predetermined amount of compensation each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent, basis. The predetermined amount cannot be reduced because of variations in the quality or quantity of the employee's work."

Not to discredit the entire article on one little thing...

But she says that programmers aren't exempt until they make $90k a year. That is a lie.

department of labor says it's $455 a week... he makes more than that I'm sure. Perhaps it's only wishful thinking.

Maybe in Canada it's that way, but not so in the US, unless the individual state has a law about it. Companies can demand as much overtime as they want, and if the employee is exempt, they don't have to be paid for this extra time. Refusal to work overtime is a legimate grounds for termination. Check out the following FAQ from the US Dept of Labor, in the Overtime section:

http://www.dol.gov/elaws/faq/esa/flsa/toc.htm

Wrong. The Department of Labor enforces things like overtime laws. The problem is that it only works if you are not "exempt."

Typically, "Exempt" refers to "professions" such as lawyer, doctor, and engineer. It can also apply to "management." A software coder without the word "engineer" in their title might be able to be considered non-exempt. The only way to know for sure is to contact the department of labor: http://www.dol.gov/.

They may be a bit slow to answer their phones, but keep trying!

Whatever. I went through the process three times, I think I know the pains involved. I refer you to:

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/Title_20/Part_655/to c.htm

Moreover, I cite 8 usc 1182 (n)(1)(G)(i) which you mention yourself:

(i) In the case of an application described in subparagraph (E)(ii), subject to clause (ii), the employer, prior to filing the application--
(I) has taken good faith steps to recruit, in the United States using procedures that meet industry-wide standards and offering compensation that is at least as great as that required to be offered to H-1B nonimmigrants under subparagraph (A), United States workers for the job for which the nonimmigrant or nonimmigrants is or are sought; and
(II) has offered the job to any United States worker who applies and is equally or better qualified for the job for which the nonimmigrant or nonimmigrants is or are sought.

If this confuses you:

(ii) The conditions described in clause (i) shall not apply to an application filed with respect to the employment of an H-1B nonimmigrant who is described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of section 1153 (b)(1) of this title.

It only applies to "Aliens with extraordinary ability" which is pretty much limited to people with brains oozing out of their ears or "Certain multinational executives and managers"

Am I missing something here?

The minimum wage law (the FLSA) applies to employees of enterprises that do at least $500,000 in business a year. It also applies to employees of smaller firms if the employees are engaged in interstate commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, such as employees who work in transportation or communications or who regularly use the mails or telephones for interstate communications. It also applies to employees of federal, state or local government agencies, hospitals and schools, and it generally applies to domestic workers.

This federal minimum wage law will cover any resturant that has or recieve product from other states or is part of a chain that is in another state. About any companie that employs more them 3 people will fall into this catagory. I'm sure if you look hard enough you might find someone bending the laws a little and staying out but the majority of places will fit into one of the catagories were federal minimum wage falls into play. IT just isn't practicle for an employer to isolate itself from the outside world like that and plan on making money. There might be some small company that slides by but the majority of companies won't fall into that catagory.

In your example, lets see what a person working at the very lowest amount of money in ohio will have happen. They are totaly useless and can't work for any compnay (even dishwashers around the columbus area get 6-7 dollars start off)that pays at least the federal minimum wage. At $2.80 and 40 hour weeks with no vacation, they get around $5820 a year. This is in the poverty range and they do qualify for food stamp and medical card. They also qualify for housing assistance. Whats your point they are covered!

To recap, The federal laws aply to more then just government projects, It also aplies to people using the mail or phones for out of state comunication. This will cover the majority of companies out there. And even when the low minimum wage levels do come into play, they make so little they are absorbed by a government program already in place. IT is trivial to argue this point because there are programs already in place to ketch them.

And cording to federal law "state rights" step aside to this. As it was noted on the top of the page you linked to as well as the page i linked to. federal law superceeds when it say so. BTW, the constatution says whats not granted to the federa government by the constatution or congress will be left up to the states. I'm not s ure this falls into the left to the states part. Labor laws and wages as well as working hours has been controled and regulated by the federal government for a while now. Some of the limits on how long you can work have been succesfuly challenged but verry little of the rest has.

nice of you to point out old outdated usless information, instead of the actual miniumum wage. Again i think you are misscrewing reality with a little somethign to prove your point. did you even read the article you linked from? i will quote from it.
Note: Where Federal and state law have different minimum wage rates, the higher standard applies.

What this says is that if a states minimum wage is lower then the federal minimum wage then the hiest standard (eg. federal minimum wage) will apply. Not only have you selected the states that have not updates thier minimum wage laws since the federal minimum wage raised back in the 80's or 90's you also selected the very lowest minimum wage aplicable to the smallest company out there. (in ohio's case) This does nothign to further your argument except show you to be some kind of zealot.

I'm amazed that instead of linking to an article that screws the facts to pudh an agenda you misonterpret them your self and try to present it. Good job.

You don't need nore education to get out of a minimum wage job. You only need work ethic and dedication with the resolve to look for the people paying more. minimum wage jobs are only for highschool kids looking for work experience or retire people looking to supliment thier retirment income. If anyone trying to support them selves are making minimum wage they are problematic in the first place and need a reality check. Yes even here were i live, a plant closed down 2/3rds of the 3000 people that lost jobs had new jobs paying roughly the same amount within 6 months to a year from when they lost thier job (between $7 to $15 an hour). the other third took advantage of retraining programs and got absorbed into a government program learning to do other stuff.

Again, i will say that there isn't any such thing as a person that cannot make more then a minimum wage. And when people do try to support themselve they usualy share the cost of living with others and then it is the same as them making more money. IF you make minimum wage and bring in (5.15*40*4) $825 a month gross and it take around $1200 a month to live. I move in with you and share the expences and magicaly you only need $600 for basic living. Now you have an extra $225 to play with. lets say we get a third person and boom, you have almost $425 left over. Thats how it works in real life with the exception that usually the minimum wage part doesn't stick around for very long. Well it might for some slackers that think the government should provide for them and never do anyhtign more then they absolutly have to.

Another thing in dispute is comprehesive health coverage. you don't need a cover everythign plan. All you need is a major medical plan to cover accidents like breaking a leg, getting cancer or somethign. If you get the flue, see a doctor on your own. you should have opened a medical savings acount that would easily fulfil this need. Somethign cronic not covered? quit your job and go on welfare. Your not loosing anyhting on minumin wage anyways.

Why is it our parents could live thru a depresion and keep everything. they have insurance, they can pay thier bills, maybe they forgot to teach us somethign.

Minimum wages : source http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

• $2.65/hr - Kansas
• $4.00/hr - Montana
• $2.80/hr - Ohio
• $2.00/hr - Oklahoma

Nah i'm not missing the point on the working poor. I'm saying it is impracticle to count them. First, the minimum wage workers are either in highschool living with thier parents or are in some entry level job or are retired. Never mind who i think is working at minimum wage and lets examine some facts. Minimum wage is not enough to make a living on, people trying to are in more trouble then not having medical insurance in the first place. Creativly they solve these problems by getting room mates or government assistance. Then all the sudden minimum wage isn't as little as it is.

How are people supposed to get back on their feet with "Nah i'm not missing the point on the working poor. I'm saying it is impracticle to count them" as an attitude. How are they supposed to find the funds necessary to better themselves through more education, training, etc?

In 1950 the minimum wage was 19 percent what it was in 1997 cite and in 1997 the value of a dollar was about 15.1 percent of what it was in 1950cite. I would say that if you laid a graph showing the rise in minimum wage over a graph showing the rate of inflation you would see correlation.

Find out your employment stats by talking with your HR department. They can tell you if you are classified excepmpt under the "Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)".

If you are exempt, and your pay has been docked, you have a clear legal case. If you are non-exempt, then your employer is just a jerk.

Salaried means that you get paid the same fixed ammount no matter how much you work, whether it be 10 hours a week or 100. Of course what ends up happening is that they shovel so much work on you to do that you end up having to work more than 40 hours a week to do what is expected of you, otherwise you get fired.

However, if your supervisor assigns you projects with deadlines, or requires to you record your time and can penalize you for failing to meet a minimum quota, or you are required to be "at work" according to a fixed schedule, then you are probably NOT exempt from overtime.

True, factory conditions are better in the US, but consumers don't care. They want the low prices. There are plenty of NGOs who preach "don't buy Nike", but the consumer doesn't care. They want the brand, or they want the cheap knockoff. The ethics behind it are very rarely a consideration.

My original point still stands. If US consumers are worried about preseving US jobs, they need to "Buy American" The people who are worse of are the middle classes of first-world nations, particularly the lower-middle class who does all the factory work.

Dude. You're at the top. What does a "lower-middle class" factory worker make? $13 an hour. About US$25,000 a year.

Comparable workers in the rest of the world are making US$50-US$200 a month, US$600-US$2400 a year.

You are at the top of the food chain. The number of billionares is negligible and can't be taken out of the sample, but the 100 million or so workers in the US can't be.

Im sorry, I wasnt aware I needed to prove the obvious. US department of labour good enough for you?

http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/history/herman/rep orts/futurework/report/chapter4/main.htm

I wasnt predicting the demise of the human race, I was predicting an ever decreasing percentage of manufacturing jobs (R&D too IMO ... I think commodization and consolidation will accelerate). So most of us will have to be employed in service jobs ... a new age of servitude, not the end of civilization.

Look up the definition of exempt here. It has nothing to do with whether or not you are salaried. Managers are by definition, exempt and therefore don't have to be paid overtime.

If you are classified an exempt employee, you have no right to bitch about not getting paid overtime... 80 hrs is part of the job. OTOH, non exempt employees are required by law to get paid overtime, and judging by the assertion in the article ("forging time sheets"), it sure looks like "evil management".

II. Background

The FLSA generally requires covered employers to pay their
employees at least the federal minimum wage (which is currently $5.15 an hour), and overtime premium pay of time-and-one-half the regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a work week. However, the FLSA includes a number of exemptions from the minimum wage and overtime requirements. Section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA, codified at 29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1), exempts from both minimum wage and overtime pay ``any employee employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity...

(17)99 any employee who is a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, sof tware engineer, or other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is --
(A) the application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, sof tware, or system functional specifications;
(B) the design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications;
(C) the design, documentation, testing, creation, or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems; or
(D) a combination of duties described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) the performance of which requires the same level of skills, and
who, in the case of an employee who is compensated on an hourly basis, is compensated at a rate of not less than $27.63 an hour.

II. Background

The FLSA generally requires covered employers to pay their
employees at least the federal minimum wage (which is currently $5.15 an hour), and overtime premium pay of time-and-one-half the regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a work week. However, the FLSA includes a number of exemptions from the minimum wage and overtime requirements. Section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA, codified at 29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1), exempts from both minimum wage and overtime pay ``any employee employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity...

(17)99 any employee who is a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, sof tware engineer, or other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is --
(A) the application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, sof tware, or system functional specifications;
(B) the design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications;
(C) the design, documentation, testing, creation, or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems; or
(D) a combination of duties described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) the performance of which requires the same level of skills, and
who, in the case of an employee who is compensated on an hourly basis, is compensated at a rate of not less than $27.63 an hour.

I worked as an EMT with a county ambulance service for 10 years in the 80s (1980 - 1990) and we went 'round and 'round with the government body we worked for about the overtime issue. They tried to use the FLSA 7(k) and 13(b)(20) sections to exempt us from overtime for time when we might have been asleep (we almost never actually were allowed to sleep during that time, I remember one time we were out polishing the ambulance wheels at 3:30 because there was no calls at the time and the crew chief didn't want anyone to think they let us sleep on the job...) - so they were going to require us to be in the station house for 24 hours, but pay us for 16, even if we were working non-stop all 24 hours.

Of course, we were not very happy at the prospect, and complained loudly!

We were then routinely dispatched to fire scenes for 'standby' so that the county government could try to argue that we were 'fire fighting personnel' and fell under that exemption. When that didn't fly with the workers either (and the law was pointed out to the county commissioners), a LARGE chunk of back pay was paid.

The current law requires overtime for anything over 212 hours in a 28 day period for fire fighting personnel - for anyone else covered by the FLSA it is any hours over 160 in 28 days.

For you or I, that means working slightly over 10.5 hours a day every work day (5 days per week) for 4 weeks - WITHOUT GETTING OVERTIME PAY. (by the way, I am salaried and don't get overtime, anyway - but I do get compensatory time off...)

So when the article mentions the overtime protection already afforded to Fire, Police, and EMS workers, it is deceptive, as they are NOT paid under the same rules as other people.

My take on this is this is another "business friendly - fsck everyone else" move by the Bush administration. I don't like it.

You should RTFA. Even better, you should read the Labor Department's fact sheets. In particular, check out Fact Sheet 17E, which covers exemptions from overtime pay for computer-related workers. It specifically states, "Job titles do not determine exempt status."

The best factual source for these numbers is directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the US Department of Labor.

Their March 2004 Report is online, as well as archives of past reports.

Do NOT rely on any "statistics" from politically motivated people or organizations such as Robert Reich, or even any Republicans. Anybody can manipulate and cherry pick numbers to make them fit their political agenda. Use the BLS numbers only!

Unfortunately since almost all documentaries seem to be created for political/social agendas or with biases, I highly doubt that my suggestion will be used. That's why I as a potential film viewer will almost never watch a documentary on current events, regardless of the position or whether I agree with it. If it doesn't have footnotes and references I can check, I don't want to be fooled into thinking something is fact when it is not.

I call bullshit.

Yet, again, we have to explain to the socialists how the world really works.

Yet again, I have to explain to the libertarian how the capitalists really run the country.

There is a thing called supply and demand. The reason an unskilled shitty job pays $6/hr is that there are a ton of people lined up to do it. The reason another job pays $45/hr is that there are not many people who can't [sic] do it. Do you think the person who pays $45/hr wants to pay $45/hr? Nope, they would rather pay you $6/hr, but they can't because there is a scarcity of labor for the $45/hr job.

$45/hr is paid for the white-collar jobs because there would be open revolt in the streets if it wasn't. Look at Argentina and Venezuela to see what I mean -- they have engineers in those countries too. Also look at Brazil to see what the false assertions of supply and demand can ultimately lead to. Or if you want the home-grown version, just read Nickel and Dimed.

It has nothing to do with supply and demand, it has everything to do with maintaining the social order. Don't believe me? Read up on the struggle to set a minimum wage. By paying a modest income to the middle class, the upper class maintains power by ensuring that the middle class identifies with them and not the working class, preventing the 99% of the country in the two lower classes from joining together and forcibly changing the distribution of wealth. Simple and effective, dating back to ancient times.

FYI I know lots of $6/hr jobs that are actually quite fun to do, I'd even take one if I could ever find a combination of (barebones dwelling + mandated auto insurance + electricity) that $6/hr could pay for. Those jobs aren't shitty, and the people in them aren't shitty either. You might check your (false) classist elitism at the door next time you argue economics.

It has nothing to do with physical labor. Very few people can NOT do a physical intensive labor job and very few people have the skill set for the $45/hr job.

*laugh* Yeah, right. I may not be able to pick random people off the bus to do my (former) job, but I've got five friends making $10/hr who could've done it if they could have gotten through the hiring process. But without a college degree -- that is to say a piece of paper from an accredited school proving that they have family money or are indebted already -- they are magically unable to perform the same duties I did. It's called "artificial scarcity", and it's what happens when the bar is (needlessly) raised to get any good-paying job.

<sarcasm>Next I suppose you'll be helping your employer outsource your own job, because that too is just an expression of supply and demand.</sarcasm> (Hint: Look up Bretton Woods, the petrodollar, and the creation of the floating money exchange. Yet another artificial monkeywrench into the global economy to make the American dollar purchase way more than it's theoretically supposed to.)

Ok first, why this has been modded to +5 when it could arguably be flamebait is beyond me

And arguably, it should be modded to +5. Arguably, the poster (me) doesn't give a shit either way. Arguably, one man's flamebait is another man's +5 (Funny). Arguably, it seems like a waste of time to bitch about moderation. (Do you meta-moderate, or bitch about that too?)

I suppose if it takes you too much beyond that amount of time maybe you are (and I use this in the truest sense of the word) retarded.

Actually I meant that if you don't understand why this isn't allowed then you're retarded, although I won't argue the point. It seems obvious to me that if that were the case, then unscrupulous employers would bully their workers to clock out at 40 hours and finish their assigned work on their own time or risk being fired. Since most of us don't determine our own work load, the amount of time it should take to finish a given set of tasks is highly subjective, and I will cynically assume that employers and employees will have radically different ideas about what is or is not reasonable. Thus the feds step in and set the admittedly arbitrary limit at 40 hours per week (without overtime pay for non-exempt employees) and this compromise (mexican standoff?) has been in place for a couple of generations. It is now threatened. I guess working 60 hours a week didn't kill our great-grandparents, maybe it won't hurt us either.

By the way, I'm curious what federal labor laws the parent is refering to here

Here ya go

It is, and it is.

Willful violations may be prosecuted criminally and the violator fined up to $10,000. A second conviction may result in imprisonment.

From this page within the site given in the parent:

What About Timekeeping?: Employers may use any timekeeping method they choose. For example, they may use a time clock, have a timekeeper keep track of employee's work hours, or tell their workers to write their own times on the records. Any timekeeping plan is acceptable as long as it is complete and accurate.

So while rounding may be acceptable, it could not be applied discriminately to result in any inaccurate result over a period of sustained time.

The Feds issued a memo (or white paper or something simiar) a few months ago explaining how employers in the US can do this by reducing the hourly wage, pay overtime on the reduced rate, so that the total weekly wage comes out exactly the same as if no overtime pay was earned. It's 7th grade math, and probably not many of the intended recipients needed the help. Nice to know the administration is thinking about the little guys though. Guffaw. Details

Employees in the U.S. have so few rights

Eh? Ever hear of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)? I'd say those are some pretty good rights, including the ability to get back pay (with penalties and interest) long after a bad deed is done. Please don't take a story about some bad companies (who are no doubt headed for trouble on this) and make broad, sweeping US-bashing statements that aren't really true. There are plenty of valid points on which to bash the US, but I don't think this is one of them. The rights are there. The companies in this story violated them, and are subject to penalties because of it. Read the site -- the punishment can be tough, including prison time:

violations may be prosecuted criminally and the violator fined up to $10,000. A second conviction may result in imprisonment.

And what's that about companies not paying taxes? What color is the sky on your planet?

Surprise! The USDOL doesn't allow averaging for hourly, non-exempt employees -- ever. I suppose one might arrange such a deal, and as long as neither party complains ever, then the DOL would be none the wiser. But if the employee ever decided he or she didn't like it, the employer would be in trouble. That'd be a bad agreement for the employer, in the long run.

Contracts that violate federal law, even when agreed to by both parties, are unenforceable.

According to this map most of the United States sets their wage at the federal minimum wage, $5.25/hr.

I'd hate to live in Kansas or Ohio, but then again I'm guessing the cost of living is cheaper there. Of course the cost of living in New York is high and our minimum wage is at the federal minimum.