Slashdot Mirror

What is even more interesting than the fact that they are actually acknowledging open source, is that they are releasing an open source product: Workforce Connections

My company made all of the Systems people go hourly based on a previous lawsuit that they lost regarding some assistant managers. Anyway, After we were made hourly, we all had to fill out a weeks worth of "job diaries" that explained everything we did during the day. This was to determine if we made enough decisions to be declared management/exempt. During this whole thing did some reserch and included some links below. Hope this helps. Oh, and this is in California.

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_54 1/29CFR541.3.htm
http://www.dir.ca.gov/DLSE/dlse.html
3 slashdot links on this subject:
http://ask.slashdot.org/askslashdot/03/06/15/19522 40.shtml?tid=187&tid=98&tid=99
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/11/02 23211&tid=124
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/03/24/23 42259&tid=123
And a couple of labor lawyers:
http://www.overtimelawyer.com/
http://www.wmlaborlaw.com/

PS. I stayed hourly and it ended up being a $17000/yr raise with the OT.

That was the first thing I thought when I read this. But it turns out that only "covered nonexempt" employees are required to be paid minimum wage (reference), so I'm sure a creative employer could find loopholes (though he might have trouble finding employees). There are many exemptions to the Fair Labor Standards Act, including the provision that "certain computer professionals paid at least $27.63 per hour are exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA."

That was the first thing I thought when I read this. But it turns out that only "covered nonexempt" employees are required to be paid minimum wage (reference), so I'm sure a creative employer could find loopholes (though he might have trouble finding employees). There are many exemptions to the Fair Labor Standards Act, including the provision that "certain computer professionals paid at least $27.63 per hour are exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA."

According to the US Dept of Labor, from their 2002-3 Occupational Outlook Handbook, s/w engineers "are projected to be the fastest growing occupation over the 2000-10 period" while employment growth for programmers "will be considerably slower than that of other computer specialists, due to the spread of pre-packaged software solutions".
If you're worried about your job security, start learning more than just programming languages and APIs. (Of course, until we have a proper accreditation system, anyone in the s/w industry can call themselves an engineer...)

no, my man, COBRA was a godsend to me and most my laid off friends.

Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986

and slightly off topic but there are people trying to end it...

As someone else mentioned, all but the smallest businesses can get better rates on insurance than an individual can on their own.

And, if I do lose my job, I'll still be insured.

So will I, thanks to COBRA. The details matter but basically it lets an individual keep their health insurance for up to 18 months if they lose their job, the individual just pays the amount the employer paid. My partner lost her job with a medium-sized non-profit (~100 people). In 2002 we paid $223/month for her coverage (Blue Cross Blue Shield, non-smoker, 30-somthing). She went to school and was insured through the school but if we paid the full amount for the same coverage, it was going to be $380/month. That's almost $1900 more per year.

WARN
Sorry. Should have made that a link in the original.

What country? Here in the U.S. the minimum is $5.15.

No. The code pertaining to the hiring of nonimmigrant workers on H-1B visas is publically available. The bill states that H-1B dependent employers must certify that no domestic American workers were available or diplaced at the time when the H-1B worker was hired. The catch is that practically no companies are "H-1B dependent employers,"--see the bill for the formal definition--So none of them actually have to show this. However, they are likely still in violation since they must attest to paying the H-1B workers a prevailing wage, which many do not. If you personally know of a company which is in violation then you can file a complaint with the DOL by using this form. If you don't like the H-1B visa program you can help to get it repealed. There is a bill in congress now which does just that. If you are in favor of this bill, then tell your representatives about it.

No. The code pertaining to the hiring of nonimmigrant workers on H-1B visas is publically available. The bill states that H-1B dependent employers must certify that no domestic American workers were available or diplaced at the time when the H-1B worker was hired. The catch is that practically no companies are "H-1B dependent employers,"--see the bill for the formal definition--So none of them actually have to show this. However, they are likely still in violation since they must attest to paying the H-1B workers a prevailing wage, which many do not. If you personally know of a company which is in violation then you can file a complaint with the DOL by using this form. If you don't like the H-1B visa program you can help to get it repealed. There is a bill in congress now which does just that. If you are in favor of this bill, then tell your representatives about it.

US Federal law says that staff who earn part of their wages from tips must be paid at least $2.13/hr.

Many restraunts do that. You work, you get $2.25/hr (or whatever the boss is nice enough to pay you). So in most places, the staff are very dependant on your tips.

I tip 20%, and then adjust by service. If the service seriously sucked ass, you may get nothing. If you were really good, you may get 20% rounded up to the nearest $10. ($85 dollar meal would get a $20 tip). Knowing most people are complete idiots who don't tip for good service, it's worth it for me for two reasons. 1) they deserve decent pay if they did a good job. 2) I expect good service next time I come in, and will probably get it. Usually if I tip well and come back another day, I get better than average service. Places I go regularly, I don't have to ask for my drink, they'll have it ready by the time I'm seated.

But, tipping doesn't excuse impoliteness. Well, you probably wouldn't get a tip if you're looking at all your customers saying "What kind of idiot....", but the polite waiter gets pleases and thank you's, and a good tip.

But in some parts of the world, this isn't expected or acceptable. I gave a taxi driver in Europe a $10 tip for getting me from point A to point B in no time. He was polite, held the door for me, yada, yada, yada. He was completely flabergasted that I gave him anything extra.

In New York, I gave a taxi driver $20 for getting me from Times Square to the WTC in less than 5 minutes. Of course, stop lights and lane markings are frequently meaningless, so that helped accomplish the time. :) It saved my ass though, I had to be in like 3 places at once, and got everything accomplished on a very short timetable.

In some US cities, you may be lucky the car doesn't hit you driving away if you don't tip.

Flight attendants don't take tips, and get offended when you offer one. I haven't quite figured that one out yet. If I buy a beer from a fight attendant, they are the bartender, and the bartender always get tipped.

So, maybe in the UK you don't take tips, fine. In some countries it's most of the money that they make. In some jobs it's the majority of their paycheck.

I don't tip because I have extra money. I tip because I've worked just about every shit job there is at some point in time, and can completely relate to them having to deal with asshole customers every day who think that $2.25/hr actually pays the rent in most metro areas.

Section 13(a)(l) of the FLSA exempts executive, administrative, professional, and outside sales employees from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the FLSA, provided they meet certain tests regarding job duties and responsibilities and are compensated "on a salary basis" at not less than stated amounts.

I've got a LOT more information, if anybody would like it.

I'm not at home right now, but here are the links for some of the easier-to-find information:

Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as Amended (PDF)
Regulations from the Department of Labor (DOL) about certain portions of the FLSA

I'm too lazy to do any real searching, but if anybody would like specific links, I can send them to you. Send me an e-mail, netadm2000@hotmail.com.

I've got a LOT more information, if anybody would like it.

I'm not at home right now, but here are the links for some of the easier-to-find information:

Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as Amended (PDF)
Regulations from the Department of Labor (DOL) about certain portions of the FLSA

I'm too lazy to do any real searching, but if anybody would like specific links, I can send them to you. Send me an e-mail, netadm2000@hotmail.com.

Year Annual
1950 5.21
1955 4.37
1960 5.54
1965 4.51
1970 4.98
1975 8.48
1980 7.18
1985 7.19
1990 5.62
1995 5.59
2000 4.00
2003YTD 5.97

### June 2003 Data ###
7.9% Construction
7.0% Manufacturing
6.9% Wholesale and Retail Trade
5.5% Transportation and Utilities
6.4% Information Industry
4.0% Financial Activities
8.5% Professional and Business Services <-----<<
4.4% Education and Health Services
8.6% Leisure and Hospitality *
5.9% Other Services Industry
6.9% Agricultural and Related

Where can I find information about these rules?

here are the federal ones. I believe all 50 states have their own, as well. I know at least some of them do.

So, make the person the CEO/DJ.

The key is the person's actual job, not his title. Otherwise McDonalds would have already started naming its burger flippers CEOs by now.

This page seems to indicate there must be at least 2 employees and the business must make in excess of $500,000 in order for minimum wage laws to apply for all employees. OR the business is involved in interstate commerce OR the employee is a domestic servant... (baby sitter, yard worker, etc.)

I see two ways around this... Pay by job, not by the hour. Then you are not paying a wage persay, but paying for a product or service. Another way around it would be to gift the $100 to the person.

Regarding working with a mental disability, sometimes you are just as capable as a normal person, sometimes more, and sometimes waay less. I've had long periods where I have been unable to work unfortunately, but fortunately we have the Family and Medical Leave act in the US which allows for up to 12 weeks of unpaid job protected leave if necessary. Read more about it here: http://www.dol.gov/elaws/fmla.htm. Hopefully you won't have to use it, but it is a nice safety net to have if you really need it at times.

best of luck with your condition. As one with a mental disability, I know that it can be a long frustrating road out of hell and a rocky one on the way, but there is hope, and many medications that can help.

Yes, but they are also driving down the price of unskilled labor

There's a reason why unskilled labor is cheap. Are you suggesting that someone who stocks shelves and mops floors deserves the same pay as someone who busted his ass to gain the skills to not have to take that kind of job?

and expect employees to work unpaid overtime.

There are laws against that. I'm sure that Labor would be interested in hearing about instances such as that (they busted Best Buy a couple of years ago for overtime violations).

The application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, software, or system functional specifications)

The design, development, documentation, analysis, creating, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications.

The design, documentation, testing, creating, or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems.

A combination of duties described above.

For those of you who are wondering, that basically means System Analysts, Software Engineer, or Programmer. It does NOT include telephone technical support or a "senior network administrator / project manager (see this article on pages 4 and 9... sorry, no direct link to the opinion letter, although if you get a copy of it, let me know).

To fit the Computer Exemption, secondary duties can NOT take up more than 20% (or 40% for "service establishments") of your time. For the Management Exemption, you must supervise at least 2 employees, have the authority to hire or fire people (or make recommendations that carry weight), and not spend more than 20% or 40% (see above) of your time on secondary duties.


I was burned by my last employer, and I'm looking to get him back... so I've done lots of homework about this kind of thing. If you're interested in any of the documents I have, or have anything to offer, my e-mail address is netadm2000@hotmail.com.

the fair labor standards act is the core of the law, alongside some additional regulations. there are a number of additional links on this page. there are a ton of fact sheets also available. do remember that the fact sheets are a guideline, but are not the actual law.

as for state laws, check your state dept. of labor, or simply look for an online (or print) version of state laws. in general, more progressive states are likely to have more stringent laws, less progressive states are less likely to have anything (or they may be more lax, making them effecitively a waste of paper or electrons).

some of my understanding also is derived from assorted HR web sites. i did not mark them and don't remember which ones, as it's been a little while. however, a search for HR targeted sites, online magazines, or print magazines should lead you to some discussion of the issue at large along side some case studies.

finally, i remember reading, perhaps on the DOL site somewhere, perhaps elsewhere, both case studies and actual judgements from DOL prosecutions (news or press release page maybe?). these too can be useful to gain an understanding.

once again, my original comment is my own, non-attorney, interpretation of all of the above. see an attorney or the DOL for more solid advice. also, feel free to take this information to them and run it by them -- might save you a few bucks in legal fees (then again, it might just get to laughed at ).

the fair labor standards act is the core of the law, alongside some additional regulations. there are a number of additional links on this page. there are a ton of fact sheets also available. do remember that the fact sheets are a guideline, but are not the actual law.

as for state laws, check your state dept. of labor, or simply look for an online (or print) version of state laws. in general, more progressive states are likely to have more stringent laws, less progressive states are less likely to have anything (or they may be more lax, making them effecitively a waste of paper or electrons).

some of my understanding also is derived from assorted HR web sites. i did not mark them and don't remember which ones, as it's been a little while. however, a search for HR targeted sites, online magazines, or print magazines should lead you to some discussion of the issue at large along side some case studies.

finally, i remember reading, perhaps on the DOL site somewhere, perhaps elsewhere, both case studies and actual judgements from DOL prosecutions (news or press release page maybe?). these too can be useful to gain an understanding.

once again, my original comment is my own, non-attorney, interpretation of all of the above. see an attorney or the DOL for more solid advice. also, feel free to take this information to them and run it by them -- might save you a few bucks in legal fees (then again, it might just get to laughed at ).

the fair labor standards act is the core of the law, alongside some additional regulations. there are a number of additional links on this page. there are a ton of fact sheets also available. do remember that the fact sheets are a guideline, but are not the actual law.

as for state laws, check your state dept. of labor, or simply look for an online (or print) version of state laws. in general, more progressive states are likely to have more stringent laws, less progressive states are less likely to have anything (or they may be more lax, making them effecitively a waste of paper or electrons).

some of my understanding also is derived from assorted HR web sites. i did not mark them and don't remember which ones, as it's been a little while. however, a search for HR targeted sites, online magazines, or print magazines should lead you to some discussion of the issue at large along side some case studies.

finally, i remember reading, perhaps on the DOL site somewhere, perhaps elsewhere, both case studies and actual judgements from DOL prosecutions (news or press release page maybe?). these too can be useful to gain an understanding.

once again, my original comment is my own, non-attorney, interpretation of all of the above. see an attorney or the DOL for more solid advice. also, feel free to take this information to them and run it by them -- might save you a few bucks in legal fees (then again, it might just get to laughed at ).

the fair labor standards act is the core of the law, alongside some additional regulations. there are a number of additional links on this page. there are a ton of fact sheets also available. do remember that the fact sheets are a guideline, but are not the actual law.

as for state laws, check your state dept. of labor, or simply look for an online (or print) version of state laws. in general, more progressive states are likely to have more stringent laws, less progressive states are less likely to have anything (or they may be more lax, making them effecitively a waste of paper or electrons).

some of my understanding also is derived from assorted HR web sites. i did not mark them and don't remember which ones, as it's been a little while. however, a search for HR targeted sites, online magazines, or print magazines should lead you to some discussion of the issue at large along side some case studies.

finally, i remember reading, perhaps on the DOL site somewhere, perhaps elsewhere, both case studies and actual judgements from DOL prosecutions (news or press release page maybe?). these too can be useful to gain an understanding.

once again, my original comment is my own, non-attorney, interpretation of all of the above. see an attorney or the DOL for more solid advice. also, feel free to take this information to them and run it by them -- might save you a few bucks in legal fees (then again, it might just get to laughed at ).

the fair labor standards act is the core of the law, alongside some additional regulations. there are a number of additional links on this page. there are a ton of fact sheets also available. do remember that the fact sheets are a guideline, but are not the actual law.

as for state laws, check your state dept. of labor, or simply look for an online (or print) version of state laws. in general, more progressive states are likely to have more stringent laws, less progressive states are less likely to have anything (or they may be more lax, making them effecitively a waste of paper or electrons).

some of my understanding also is derived from assorted HR web sites. i did not mark them and don't remember which ones, as it's been a little while. however, a search for HR targeted sites, online magazines, or print magazines should lead you to some discussion of the issue at large along side some case studies.

finally, i remember reading, perhaps on the DOL site somewhere, perhaps elsewhere, both case studies and actual judgements from DOL prosecutions (news or press release page maybe?). these too can be useful to gain an understanding.

once again, my original comment is my own, non-attorney, interpretation of all of the above. see an attorney or the DOL for more solid advice. also, feel free to take this information to them and run it by them -- might save you a few bucks in legal fees (then again, it might just get to laughed at ).

the fair labor standards act is the core of the law, alongside some additional regulations. there are a number of additional links on this page. there are a ton of fact sheets also available. do remember that the fact sheets are a guideline, but are not the actual law.

as for state laws, check your state dept. of labor, or simply look for an online (or print) version of state laws. in general, more progressive states are likely to have more stringent laws, less progressive states are less likely to have anything (or they may be more lax, making them effecitively a waste of paper or electrons).

some of my understanding also is derived from assorted HR web sites. i did not mark them and don't remember which ones, as it's been a little while. however, a search for HR targeted sites, online magazines, or print magazines should lead you to some discussion of the issue at large along side some case studies.

finally, i remember reading, perhaps on the DOL site somewhere, perhaps elsewhere, both case studies and actual judgements from DOL prosecutions (news or press release page maybe?). these too can be useful to gain an understanding.

once again, my original comment is my own, non-attorney, interpretation of all of the above. see an attorney or the DOL for more solid advice. also, feel free to take this information to them and run it by them -- might save you a few bucks in legal fees (then again, it might just get to laughed at ).

California also has some of their own additions, if you live there look into them.

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_29/Part_54 1/29CFR541.3.htm

Not many people outside of operations environments are non-exempt in IT. As such, they are paid for their skill, and not their time.

Dan

And where is unemployment at 10%?

Germany, at 10.5% :) France is close at 8.8%.

Meanwhile, for all the complaining, Feb 2003 values for the USA are 5.8%

Let's hear it for global economies!

Eh, whatever. All this reminds me of my sister and her friends, who this year are graduating seniors from Pitt. Those that are willing to move are having no problems finding jobs (my sister has a job offer in the oil industry, with a 6-month assignment in Norway). Those that are not willing to move are currently unemployed. The opportunities are out there, if they would shut up about how unfair the world is, and look for it.

The Fair Labor Standards Act, Sec. 13(a)(17), added by the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, specifically exempts certain computer industry professionsals from overtime requirements. The text of this section is as follows:

(17) any 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 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.

We recently went through the painful process of re-assigning exemption status at the company for which I work. It was discovered that, though there might be cachet with a salary, an hourly wage can be very lucrative. (I'm salaried; no overtime for me.)

Again a possilbe gray area. Generally a salaried employee is still eligible for overtime unless they fit the "White Collar Exemption"(Here are more common overtime exemptions).

The two best fits in the whitecollar exemption are(from http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs17 .htm:

"Administrative Exemption

Applicable to employees who perform office or non-manual work which is directly related to the management policies or general business operations of their employer or their employer's customers, or perform such functions in the administration of an educational establishment; who regularly exercise discretion and judgment in their work; who either assist a proprietor or executive, perform specialized or technical work, or execute special assignments; who receive a salary which meets the requirements of the exemption; and who do not devote more than 20% of their time to work other than that described above (40% in retail and service establishments).

Professional Exemption

Applicable to employees who perform work requiring advanced knowledge and education, work in an artistic field which is original and creative, work as a teacher, or work as a computer system analyst, programmer, software engineer, or similarly skilled worker in the computer software field; who regularly exercise discretion and judgment; who perform work which is intellectual and varied in character, the accomplishment of which cannot be standardized as to time; who receive a salary which meets the requirements of the exemption (except doctors, lawyers, teachers and certain computer occupations); and who do not devote more than 20% of their time to work other than that described above."

Now IANAL, but there is a great deal of room for interpretation in there. A front-line (or even higher up) tech support person most likely doesn't meet the adminsitrative exemption (beacuse they won't be seetting management policy) and possibly the professional exemption

The FLSA is a big complex mess designed to stop employers from screwing employees. Sometimes in the process they limit worker's choices too. People run into this same issue in other areas too. Volunteer firefights in many counties have to resign from their volunteering position if they take a within the Fire/Rescue department of that county (even if there is no overlap between jobs). The problem is that in general many "volunteered" hours to companies aren't voluntary.

Again a possilbe gray area. Generally a salaried employee is still eligible for overtime unless they fit the "White Collar Exemption"(Here are more common overtime exemptions).

The two best fits in the whitecollar exemption are(from http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs17 .htm:

"Administrative Exemption

Applicable to employees who perform office or non-manual work which is directly related to the management policies or general business operations of their employer or their employer's customers, or perform such functions in the administration of an educational establishment; who regularly exercise discretion and judgment in their work; who either assist a proprietor or executive, perform specialized or technical work, or execute special assignments; who receive a salary which meets the requirements of the exemption; and who do not devote more than 20% of their time to work other than that described above (40% in retail and service establishments).

Professional Exemption

Applicable to employees who perform work requiring advanced knowledge and education, work in an artistic field which is original and creative, work as a teacher, or work as a computer system analyst, programmer, software engineer, or similarly skilled worker in the computer software field; who regularly exercise discretion and judgment; who perform work which is intellectual and varied in character, the accomplishment of which cannot be standardized as to time; who receive a salary which meets the requirements of the exemption (except doctors, lawyers, teachers and certain computer occupations); and who do not devote more than 20% of their time to work other than that described above."

Now IANAL, but there is a great deal of room for interpretation in there. A front-line (or even higher up) tech support person most likely doesn't meet the adminsitrative exemption (beacuse they won't be seetting management policy) and possibly the professional exemption

The FLSA is a big complex mess designed to stop employers from screwing employees. Sometimes in the process they limit worker's choices too. People run into this same issue in other areas too. Volunteer firefights in many counties have to resign from their volunteering position if they take a within the Fire/Rescue department of that county (even if there is no overlap between jobs). The problem is that in general many "volunteered" hours to companies aren't voluntary.

Employees volunteering time falls under a very gray(well actually not that gray) area of the Fair Flabor Standards Act(FLSA). The general consensus is that empolyees cannot volunteer time to their employer: almost always this falls under the definition of Hours Worked. The ISP is most likely worried that some point down the road their Tech (who was originally doing this of their own free will) will demand compensation ( and the requisite overtime) for their "voluneered" hours.

You know if I was the employer, I would do the same thing.

The Department of Labor Elaws has some easy to understand interpretations of various FLSA previsions.

Can you imagine what the Teamsters would do if companies started bringing in the equivalent of H1-B visa workers to drive trucks at below-normal wages?

If we had a union, do you think that Congress would have been able to pass legislation that specifically exempted hourly computer professionals from receiving 1.5x overtime pay?

Do you think that a union would stand by idly while temp agencies regularly skimmed 30% and more off of the pay earned by immigrants and recent grads in the tech sector?

Do you believe that our industry would consistently lay off older, better-compensated workers only to replace them with recent grads if we had a union?

I know that there is going to a lot of macho posturing on here with people boasting that they are so good that they can set their own terms. But posturing is all that it is. For every 100 people that claim to be in the driver's seat in such contract negotiations, maybe one really is. The majority of companies have standard terms and don't deviate from them except for the most highly compensated corporate officers. Tell them you won't work for them unless they agree to include a buyout clause on your contract and they will tell you to take a hike. Just take a look at the average software engineer's office and compare it to the offices of people in other jobs that require similar quantities of skill and education. Do you think that corporate attorneys regularly sit in cramped cubicles?

The longer I am in this field (now more than 20 years), the more I start to believe a union would be a good thing.

I'm a Marine, I earn below the minimum wage, in fact well below the poverty line. I take home $2012 each month after taxes.

That would be about $32,192 (assuming at worst a 25% tax rate, most tax rates are much higher). Unless you've got six kids, you're not below the poverty threshold (and you've already said you have 2 kids). And in order for you to be making less than minimum wage, you'd have to be working over 100 hours per week.

To give an example, I take home about $2030 a month, and I'm considered to be above average in a state with a very high average salary (it's not Alaska, but it's pretty high) - as an IT person.

When I see people in technology working 80 and 90 hour weeks for $50k/yr

As soon as the economy turns around jump ship. There is no reason anyone should be working this amount of hours on a consistent basis. Maybe every once in a while, like perhaps once or twice a year, but beyond that is just abuse of employees. Unfortunately, the way the Fair Labor Standards Act is written alot of the technology and engineering workers are exempt from overtime pay. So the solution is not to unionize, but make sure the law gets changed to allow proper compensation of all workers. If you think about it when you work 80 - 90 hours all the time you aren't getting jack for per hour of pay. A normal work year is 2,080 hours (52-weeks x 40 hours per week), but at say 80-hours a week one is only making $12 an hour... pretty pathetic and downright abuse for an engineering or technical job.

However, I still do not feel the answer is unionization. I agree with others and believe that unionization promotes mediocrity in our field and we cannot have that. It also protects the jobs of the incompetent and that is an extreme disservice to our industry. Instead work hard, be the best engineer (in my case) you can be and learn to excel beyond your peers. Then when the economy shifts jump to a better job and leave your old employer crying for their abuses. If they treated enought people this way hopefully all of their good employees will leave and they will fold. A tech company is nothing without its good talent.

JOhn

I don't know why I'm bothering to reply to this, but here I go anyway. Goodbye karma.

blockquote> Try showing Todd some compassion. He is not an elitist ass, his parents could only afford state school! We all know that EVERYONE has $16,000 a year to spend on higher education (estimated annual cost to attend UIUC in 2001/2002).

Considering I didn't attend UIUC in the 2001/2002 school year, those numbers don't apply. When I was there, tuition averaged $9000 for in-state students, plus another couple thou for room&board (pick what you want -- dorms could cost upwards of $5000/year with meal plans. Apartments were much cheaper. Certified public housing (frats/sororities, various independent dorms) ran anywhere from cheaper than an apartment to more expensive than the dorms). So, that's what, $14000, assuming an average of $5000 room&board? So my parents could afford it. Good for me. That doesn't mean others can't afford it with scholarships, government grants, low-interest loans, work/study programs, getting a job, etc. Higher education is easily available and affordable to those who apply themselves. Sure, if you can't afford university without help, and you don't seek out help, then of course you're not going to be able to afford it. But that's laziness.

There is no such thing as inequality in America... we all go to excellent suburban public schools, no? Can't EVERYBODY's parents make enough to cough up a measly $16,000 a year so that their child can earn a decent salary? Sure, as long as they don't make minimum wage. With the current federal minimum wage of $5.15, annual income is only $10,300...

See above about getting money for college. I'm all for the government using my tax dollars to help other people educate themselves. As for minimum wage, I think it would help if you went back and understood the history of minimum wage.. The Fair Labor Standards Act, which (among other things) created the minimum wage during the Great Depression as part of FDR's Second New Deal program, was meant to succeed where the NRA (National Industry Recovery Act, not National Rifle Association) failed. In fact, the NRA was struck down as unconstitutional (or near enough as makes no difference). What many people conveniently forget is that the New Deal programs were not intended to run indefinitely. The goal was to get out of the depression and back to a more normal economy and then resume a classic Laissez-Faire approach to the market. Sadly, that did not happen. We took the first steps towards a socialist country in the 1930's, and have never backtracked. The point here? Minimum wage was meant to force a wage increase in a time of deep economic depression. It was not meant to continue perpetually as a "living wage". Yes, it sucks if a family has only one wage earner making minimum wage. Do I feel bad for that family? Sure. Would I be willing to help that family? It depends. Use my tax dollars to help the main wage earner improve his or her education so s/he can get a better job. Use my tax dollars to subsidize the family's housing while the wage earner goes and gets a second job (two minimum wage jobs, at 40 hours per week, $5.15 per hour, no vacations, will net $21424. That's non-taxed. Meaning the earner gets to keep every penny). Do not just hand out my money willy-nilly to anybody who holds out their hands. If you want my money, you have to be willing to get off your ass and try to better yourself. (as with everything, there are exceptions. Disabled veterans that cannot work and have no wage-earning family should receive special compensation. But that's because they performed a service for the country, and the country should reward them in turn.) Now, let's assume you come from a minimum wage family. Does that automatically mean you have no chance at a good education? Absolutely not. Public school for grades K-12 is free, for all intents and purposes. You may say that public schools "suck", and you might be right, but I say that anyone with the dedication can get a good education at any public school. It may mean seeking out extra work or help from teachers, but it's available. Use it. Now, after high school, it's college time. Again, you aren't left out in the cold. Financial aid is widely available and anyone from a low-income family easily qualifies for large amounts of help.

Unfortunately, based on his anti-socialism diatribe, Todd firmly believes that success is based purely on personal merit. After all, President George W. Bush Jr. is the best human in the United States, isn't he?

To a large extent, success is based on personal merit. You do well in high school, you get accepted to a good university. You do well at university, you get a good job. If you do nothing but smoke pot and slack off, you have no right to success. Socialism is fundamentally flawed because it makes the underlying assumption that everybody is equal. The problem is that people are not equal, and do not deserve equal opportunities for everything simply by virtue of being born. A college graduate that worked his/her ass off for a useful degree has more opportunities than a pot smoking high school slacker who'll probably drop out before he graduates. Should the slacker be considered for the same opportunities as the college graduate? Socialism says yes. I say no. You reap what you sow, so to speak. Obviously, blocking people from opportunities based on their race, creed, color, gender, or sexual preference is bad. But based on merit? Oh yeah. Happens all the time. It's supposed to happen that way. Oh, and I never mentioned George W. Bush Jr. at all.

However, the main issue here is a flaw in the modern assumption of what a government should do for its people. A government is a social contract, wherein the people give up self rule in order to be guaranteed such things as safety and freedom by the government. That does not include the right to a nice house, or the right to eat cake and watch circuses, or even the right to $5.15/hr for a job.

Anyway, the text ad thing is also being pushed on Google and on metafilter. I hope they replace banner ads because they load so much faster and don't blink, and they're probably more effective for advertisers because the brain doesn't block them out (most users don't even glance at banner ads) and ad blockers can't block them either.

I don't mind as long as it's clearly marked as an advertisment.

Does that mean I'm rolling over and letting "the man" trample on civil liberties? No, it simply means that I recognize the change in climate that has come to my workplace. I don't like it, but the alternative could be much worse.

Most people would be in favor of searching the parsels of NIH employees. I don't know all the stuff that you do at NIH, but I have heard it is similar to the CDC. In these times, a bit of diligence and inconvenience will be worth it. This isn't very popular with much of the /. crowd, but residents of DC (like myself) are glad to see more stringent controls and searches.

I work for a federal agency on a contract basis and I have some doubts about the feasibility of doing this stuff. As an example, there are about a dozen sub agencies in this single agency and each of them implement their own firewalls. The building itself is segmented off and there is a lack of uniform networking principles. In the end it doesn't hamper security that much, but it is *very* hard to consolidate the efforts into a single network idealogy.

Why? For starters, it is a political thing. One group likes NT, another Sun and another HP. There are vested skills and talents for managing the network for each sub agency. It may not look pretty on paper, but does anyone think you can really turn that sort of establishment on its head and impose a single network policy on the whole Government, let alone one agency?

A fresh start would in some ways be nice, and the terrorism as of late may be a strong impetus to get this off the ground, but I have some doubts about how productive it will be.

- "Engineering" (there are no "engineering" spaces on aircraft)

What, you've never heard of a flight engineer before? Here's a partial description: "The flight engineer is a technical expert, who must be thoroughly familiar with the operation and function of various airplane components." Sounds like the same concept to me.

Anyway, I agree that Starfleet is more derivative of a navy than an air force... just thought I'd clear up the "engineering" part.

Interestingly enough most of the Southern States here in the US have "right to work" laws". YMMV from state to state the laws are different but the essence is that you can't be forced to join a union in order to have a job. This doesn't mean that unions don't exist, or that by not joining a union you arn't affected by collective barganing etc..

No offense, but if these laws exist... huh? "Advanced Training" is about as vague as it gets - perhaps that means you've worked there for X period of time and "know the place" and what you're working on well. Maybe it means you have prior work experience relevant to the company. Or "certain classes of employees" - what? If there were such a stupid thing, what would prevent a company from classifying there employees in whatever way they pleased. Are there enormous checklists put out by the Department of Labor (or state laws) which enumerate the sort of tasks people who can "legally" be salaried can perform? I have a very hard time believing one must meet certain credentials in order to be salaried.

Basically, there are four types of employees that can be made exempt: Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Salespeople. We computer guys fall into the Professional group.

To be an Exempt Professional (quoting the DOL site) one must perform (1) Work requiring knowledge of an advance type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study, as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship, and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes...

or (4) Work that requires theoretical and practical application of highly-specialized knowledge in computer systems analysis, programming, and software engineering, and who is employed and engaged in these activities as a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly skilled worker in the computer software field. (This fourth item has some strings attached.)

(Clauses (2) and (3) don't pertain to us.)

If we are in a "learned profession" that is considered professional exempt, then (from the DOL) "The ``learned'' professions are described in Sec. 541.3(a)(1) as those requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes.

I also found where the department of labor states that exempt employees must "excercise discretion and independent judgement." The DOL cites an example that a computer programmer who makes the preparations, writes the code, and completes a project would be considered exempt. It also said that a junior programmer, or one that just does the flowcharting for a programmer would not be considered exempt, because they are not working independently. An exempt worker must show that they make these sorts of independent decisions "customarily and regularly."

(Yekrats)

No offense, but if these laws exist... huh? "Advanced Training" is about as vague as it gets - perhaps that means you've worked there for X period of time and "know the place" and what you're working on well. Maybe it means you have prior work experience relevant to the company. Or "certain classes of employees" - what? If there were such a stupid thing, what would prevent a company from classifying there employees in whatever way they pleased. Are there enormous checklists put out by the Department of Labor (or state laws) which enumerate the sort of tasks people who can "legally" be salaried can perform? I have a very hard time believing one must meet certain credentials in order to be salaried.

Basically, there are four types of employees that can be made exempt: Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Salespeople. We computer guys fall into the Professional group.

To be an Exempt Professional (quoting the DOL site) one must perform (1) Work requiring knowledge of an advance type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study, as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship, and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes...

or (4) Work that requires theoretical and practical application of highly-specialized knowledge in computer systems analysis, programming, and software engineering, and who is employed and engaged in these activities as a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly skilled worker in the computer software field. (This fourth item has some strings attached.)

(Clauses (2) and (3) don't pertain to us.)

If we are in a "learned profession" that is considered professional exempt, then (from the DOL) "The ``learned'' professions are described in Sec. 541.3(a)(1) as those requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes.

I also found where the department of labor states that exempt employees must "excercise discretion and independent judgement." The DOL cites an example that a computer programmer who makes the preparations, writes the code, and completes a project would be considered exempt. It also said that a junior programmer, or one that just does the flowcharting for a programmer would not be considered exempt, because they are not working independently. An exempt worker must show that they make these sorts of independent decisions "customarily and regularly."

(Yekrats)

No offense, but if these laws exist... huh? "Advanced Training" is about as vague as it gets - perhaps that means you've worked there for X period of time and "know the place" and what you're working on well. Maybe it means you have prior work experience relevant to the company. Or "certain classes of employees" - what? If there were such a stupid thing, what would prevent a company from classifying there employees in whatever way they pleased. Are there enormous checklists put out by the Department of Labor (or state laws) which enumerate the sort of tasks people who can "legally" be salaried can perform? I have a very hard time believing one must meet certain credentials in order to be salaried.

Basically, there are four types of employees that can be made exempt: Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Salespeople. We computer guys fall into the Professional group.

To be an Exempt Professional (quoting the DOL site) one must perform (1) Work requiring knowledge of an advance type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study, as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship, and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes...

or (4) Work that requires theoretical and practical application of highly-specialized knowledge in computer systems analysis, programming, and software engineering, and who is employed and engaged in these activities as a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly skilled worker in the computer software field. (This fourth item has some strings attached.)

(Clauses (2) and (3) don't pertain to us.)

If we are in a "learned profession" that is considered professional exempt, then (from the DOL) "The ``learned'' professions are described in Sec. 541.3(a)(1) as those requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes.

I also found where the department of labor states that exempt employees must "excercise discretion and independent judgement." The DOL cites an example that a computer programmer who makes the preparations, writes the code, and completes a project would be considered exempt. It also said that a junior programmer, or one that just does the flowcharting for a programmer would not be considered exempt, because they are not working independently. An exempt worker must show that they make these sorts of independent decisions "customarily and regularly."

(Yekrats)

No offense, but if these laws exist... huh? "Advanced Training" is about as vague as it gets - perhaps that means you've worked there for X period of time and "know the place" and what you're working on well. Maybe it means you have prior work experience relevant to the company. Or "certain classes of employees" - what? If there were such a stupid thing, what would prevent a company from classifying there employees in whatever way they pleased. Are there enormous checklists put out by the Department of Labor (or state laws) which enumerate the sort of tasks people who can "legally" be salaried can perform? I have a very hard time believing one must meet certain credentials in order to be salaried.

Basically, there are four types of employees that can be made exempt: Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Salespeople. We computer guys fall into the Professional group.

To be an Exempt Professional (quoting the DOL site) one must perform (1) Work requiring knowledge of an advance type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study, as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship, and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes...

or (4) Work that requires theoretical and practical application of highly-specialized knowledge in computer systems analysis, programming, and software engineering, and who is employed and engaged in these activities as a computer systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly skilled worker in the computer software field. (This fourth item has some strings attached.)

(Clauses (2) and (3) don't pertain to us.)

If we are in a "learned profession" that is considered professional exempt, then (from the DOL) "The ``learned'' professions are described in Sec. 541.3(a)(1) as those requiring knowledge of an advanced type in a field of science or learning customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual instruction and study as distinguished from a general academic education and from an apprenticeship and from training in the performance of routine mental, manual, or physical processes.

I also found where the department of labor states that exempt employees must "excercise discretion and independent judgement." The DOL cites an example that a computer programmer who makes the preparations, writes the code, and completes a project would be considered exempt. It also said that a junior programmer, or one that just does the flowcharting for a programmer would not be considered exempt, because they are not working independently. An exempt worker must show that they make these sorts of independent decisions "customarily and regularly."

(Yekrats)

In the USA, the Fair Labor Standards Act requires (1) that hourly workers be paid for hours worked and (2) that they be paid overtime for hours worked in excess of 40. The obvious question is how "on call" time fits into this system.

The Department of Labor's FLSA regulations, particularly this one, suggest that "on call" time doesn't count as work time for purposes of the FLSA. (If the employee is actually called, however, that would seem to be different -- see this regulation.)

This recent opinion from Wisconsin involving EMTs "on call" discusses a very close case, and is interesting.

In the USA, the Fair Labor Standards Act requires (1) that hourly workers be paid for hours worked and (2) that they be paid overtime for hours worked in excess of 40. The obvious question is how "on call" time fits into this system.

The Department of Labor's FLSA regulations, particularly this one, suggest that "on call" time doesn't count as work time for purposes of the FLSA. (If the employee is actually called, however, that would seem to be different -- see this regulation.)

This recent opinion from Wisconsin involving EMTs "on call" discusses a very close case, and is interesting.

In the USA, the Fair Labor Standards Act requires (1) that hourly workers be paid for hours worked and (2) that they be paid overtime for hours worked in excess of 40. The obvious question is how "on call" time fits into this system.

The Department of Labor's FLSA regulations, particularly this one, suggest that "on call" time doesn't count as work time for purposes of the FLSA. (If the employee is actually called, however, that would seem to be different -- see this regulation.)

This recent opinion from Wisconsin involving EMTs "on call" discusses a very close case, and is interesting.

Perhaps this is little late ... but I can't resist answering his comments.

>>Would you buy hamburgers from McDonalds if the
>>company also sold crack

>Could you stop them if they did? And would the
>other 90% of sheeple in America continue to buy
>McDonalds b/c they cant read/dont care? Would
>you let these same people set the co-ordinates
>on the Space Shuttle???? no - why should we just
>let the sheeple-mob steer us all into oblivion?

You touch upon a very interesting point. You are basically saying that you don't trust the people. If you can't trust your fellow citizens, whom are you going to trust? And at the same time you are saying that "90% of sheeple in America can't read/don't care?" you are asking for "business to come to town-hall style meetings and be accountable to the public". The same public that can't read and doesn't care?

>>Shell now has a human right commissioner and
>>most ads from that company state how nice the
>>company is to the environment and to it's worker

>Are you on drugs? So they put some asshole in a
>title and shove propaganda down your throat and
>you think all is well? You think they have
changed one fucking bit?

Well, Amnesty International does think Shell is trying to improve. From an Amnesty International report on Nigeria:
"In its approaches in recent years to Shell and other transnational companies [other oil companies] with significant investments in Nigeria, Amnesty International has appealed to them to acknowledge their responsibility to do all they can to uphold human rights under the UDHR. Only Shell has done so to date."
Shell was heavily attacked for their stance in Nigeria so it is understandable that they have responded to those concerns. When your stock price begins to fall because of your human rights record you have to do something.
And Amnesty International is not the only NGO that thinks Shell is trying to improve it's human rights record. Urmi Shah of Human Rights Watch believes Shell is moving in the right direction on the human rights front.

>Would you buy hamburgers from McDonalds
>if the company also sold crack
>>Could you stop them if they did?
Yes, I could stop them, with little help from the "sheeple-mob". The campaign against Shell was pretty effective. So was the campaign against Nike for employing children in it's factories. And so was the campaign against soccer ball producers in Pakistan.

>>A corporation is a body, formed by people, that
>> is authorized by law to act as a single person

>When thousands of people act on behalf of a
> corporation it is no one person who is acting
> 'evil or bad'. The problem lies in the motivations,
> what people are forced to do to feed themselves.
> They are compeled to act on the corporations
> behalf to further its interests. There is no debate
> what the 'interests' of the corporation are: profit.
> Always.

Correct, the objective of every corporation is profit, the more profit, the better. But do you have a better system? Do you want all the corporations to be owned by the government, or perhaps you have even better solution? Besides, every society has rules to control the behavior of both people and corporations. Perhaps you will just say that corporations will bend the rules and bribe the governments. If you really think so, then please tell that to all the corporations that have had their actions blocked for some reason by the European Union :)

>The worlds transnationals are all alike
> - what the hell are you thinking? There
>are none that I would consider moral and
> just. Literally zero. Besides, capatalism
> ends in collusive monopolistic mega-corps
> all acting to preserve there collective best
> interests. They will collectively oppose
> anything that may force them to become
> accountable and responsible.... I suppose
> youve never heard of RIAA/MPAA?

Yes, I have heard of RIAA/MPAA. In fact I've been following the copyright and fair rights issues for a quite a while.
Even though I don't agree with RIAA/MPAA I don't find them immoral and evil. I do in fact believe there are quite a few good multinational companies. What do you have against IBM, HP, Oracle, Volvo, Compaq, Lucent, Dell, Xerox, Fedex, Kodak, Cisco to name a few?
You may disagree with them on some issues and their products may be trash. But to say those companies are immoral is just not correct. Heck, even Microsoft has done a lot for humanity, even though Windows is crap and they are a monopoly.
Besides, most companies today are accountable to the public. They have to comply with laws in America and EU and they have to answer for their wrongdoings in the media and before shareholders meetings. And Ford has certainly suffered because of the Firestone incident. And so has Shell because of their Nigeria incident.

>>>The internet is being dismantled by people
>>> who want to stop paying anything to
>>> produce any content but make you pay
>>>everytime you access the same old content,
>>>over and over, because its gravy, all gravy.

> you didnt address his point: That big business
> will simply change/buy laws to extend copyright
> so they dont have to create new content...
>and force everyone who does out of business...

This comment is quite ridiculous. Media companies make the most money from new or recent content. Do you see Disney, WB, Paramount, etc. trying to sell their many excellent old movies. No, you don't; instead you see them marketing their new and terrible movies every single year. I don't even see book publishers heavily marketing their old books, and I don't expect to see this change in the coming years. This phenomena hasn't changed yet, even when at the same time copyrights has been extended from 25 to more than 90 years today. Do you really think media companies will suddenly begin to market their old warez just because the copyright will be extended even further?
Media companies don't even have that immense clout. They are being attacked heavily by Congress and many NGOs for violence in their movies and TV shows (perhaps you agree with those attacks?). And do you really think the media companies, with perhaps 100 billions in total revenues, have more influence on the government and congress than the much bigger computer industry [or any big industry for that matter]? The computer industry isn't that successful in it's campaigns for more visas for foreign workers and for less export regulations for encryption.

>Big American Corporations have WAY to much
>power and WAY too little public accountability.
>I dont want to 'vote with my dollars' - this simply
>allows them to predicate their 'money is the only
>thing that matters' system - fuck that: I want
>business to come to town-hall style meetings
>and be accountable to the public, you dont
>satisfy the public - your out of business (or
>something similar, I may not have the right
>mechanism - but you get the idea...)

Perhaps you are right, maybe corporations do have too much power. If you want to fix that, the right place to start is with campaign financing reform, just like John McCain is asking for.
But your town hall solution is pretty weak as you have yourself pointed out (90% of Americans are "sheeple-mob").
And using your logic ("you dont >satisfy the public - your out of business") media companies that produce material that the public doesn't like (Hustler, Nazi books, communist books, etc.) would go out of business. I'm pretty sure no movie company would have dared to produce a movie like Natural Born Killers or Lolita because every town hall meeting would have found those movies to be immoral.

Try to come up with a better logic next time.