Slashdot Mirror
Are Coders Exempt From California's Overtime Laws?
Gizmo Kid asks: "How many of you Californian, full-time, software programmers are getting paid overtime? From what I understand, a law in California, passed within the last two years, says that software engineers who make less than $41/hour [PDF version] are required to be paid for overtime? Are your employers following the rules? I'm not sure mine is?"
What an amazing idea - usually this sort of thing just gets written into your T&Cs. It certainly does where I work. If you hit a certain salary grade, they don't pay you overtime - you get TOIL instead.
War is God's way of teaching Americans geography
It really works, you get decent holidays, you dont get screwed out of your retirement. It has democracy inside ! (no inherited positions of power, for example) It depends much less on imported oil. (which will run out in your lifetime, enjoy)
(Too many other reasons to mention)
Right now most IT companies that my friends work for, and mine as well are really putting the screws to the employees. Our company is demanding more work, giving scanty raises, and lowering our benefits. Unfortunately I live in Texas which is traditionally a state that favors the employer heavily. Good luck with your OT issue, but if it was me right now I would probably just lay low being the heartless coward I am :). I know that even if you win you will probably lose your job for not turning off the lights when you leave or something stupid like that. If I were you I would just take the screwing they are giving you, keep track of your hours, and if you ever get fired or quit then sue for back pay and take the nice fat bonus at the end :).
I work for a company where my boss told my group that would like us to train other members of other groups.. ok fine no problem.. then he wants to do it outside our normal 8 hour shift.. haha that went over real well!! we told him we'd do it during work hours or not at all.. and it worked.
What I've found (and this isn't really a California thing, but more like something I've found regularly at companies) is that overtime isn't mandatory, but if you have a deadline, you need to finish your responsibility by then. If you can do it within the normal work hours, then great! More power to you! But if you can't, it would reflect badly on you if you didn't put in the extra time, despite the fact the company doesn't pay for overtime. It's one of those "you're doing it because you want to, not because we're making you" despite the fact that you are really in a situation where you need to in order not to get a bad review.
yours,
kbs
I doubt it. Not when there are thousands of programmers in countries like India who will gladly code for next to nothing. For every programmer who manages to get overtime pay due to this law, half a dozen will end up unemployeed because their job got shipped to foreign developers.
The situation for people working in the US seems to be quite bad, at least to me. Isn't it time you guys start a proper union and start raising some hell?
And how much paid vacation time I get per year? 6 weeks. How many weeks do you get in the states? And yes, I am only 26.
Complain, make it better, do something (and get free Coca Cola as mandatory).
(and if you happen to run a cool and nice company, with proper benefits, consider hiring me;))
This only applies to hourly workers who get paid less than $41/hr. If you make more, you're exempt. If you're salaried, you're exempt. Unless the laws of CA are different from elsewhere (and I worked for two CA companies).
It's been a LONG time since I've been an hourly employee.
I work as a developer for a defense contractor on the East Coast, and they do indeed give paid overtime, as well as flex time. Of course, they've been trying to get rid of that for years. Then again, if they did that, they'd have to raise salaries, because they're vastly non-competitive on base pay alone. Then there's my manager, who tells me to bring my work home and do it on the weekends, without pay, and without charging my time to the contract, which is actually very illegal. And we're not talking minimum security illegal, we're talking federal pound-me-in-the-ass illegal.
/* Steve */
But yes, as long as we're here sitting at our desks, typing away like good little code monkeys, we do get paid overtime. For now.
"Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of"-TMBG
I'd be quiet if I were you and just be happy that :)
your manager occasionally comes down from on high
to mingle with the commoners. Make sure to kiss
the feet of your corporate masters who see fit to
pay you at all. Remember, you are just a smartass
know it all computer person and people like you are
literally a dime a dozen in India. You'll bend over
if you know what's good for ya.
THANK YOU FOR LOOKING OUT FOR US CORPORATE AMERICA!!
The most important thing any republican needs to know.
As soon as you hit project manager you lose your eligibility for overtime. Oddly enough project managers work more overtime than anyone else.
I like my worker bee status.... salaried but get paid for time over 40.... I suppose I will eventually be assimilated as well.... but that's tha nature of us tech workers right? Once you hit a certain age you better be ready to enter management of some sort.... you don't see a lot of coders after 40...
Ever feel like you are driving the getaway car?
Around here overtime is one thing. That is when you are told specificly to stay longer to work on a specific project. Needs authorization from a manager / project manager in each occasion. That will cause extra money.
But if you are just a little short of time, have been surfing too much etc, then it is not overtime, but extra hours you are expected to give by your own free will. Depending on your salary, you might give 5 minutes, 15 minutes or even 30 minutes per day for free. Above that, and you usually get overtime, or have a job where the contract does not list any weekly number of hours.
here's part of the California Dept of Labor FAQ about Overtime
Here's what I would do if I were you:
1. Call the California Dept of Labor and ask them.
2. With your newfound information, talk to your boss
3. If circumstances warrant, file a wage claim.
Just because the economy is bad does not mean that you lose all of your rights.
I found this article at www.troubleshooter.com
by - Carl Khalil, Esq.
June 05, 2002
If you are like most people, you have been led to believe that if you are an executive, professional or administrative employee, you are doomed to work 60 hours per week and receive no overtime pay for your efforts, just a set salary. However, it's time to think again.
One study has estimated that 39 billion of overtime pay is owed to "salaried" employees in the United States who should actually be paid overtime at time and a half when they work over 40 hours in a week. If you are one of these salaried executives, professionals or administrators, often called white collar employees, you might be interested in knowing how likely it is that you may be entitled to a share of this money.
The Title Game. First, there is the title game. You have a big fancy executive or professional sounding title so your employer does not pay you overtime. Unfortunately for employers, federal overtime laws say that the job title is irrelevant; it is the actual work duties that control. For example, several current and former Waffle House Managers who regularly worked 80-100 hours per week were not paid overtime because they were called "Managers," which is typically an executive position and therefore exempt from overtime pay. However, in reality, the Managers spent most of their time waiting tables, cooking and washing dishes. Hence, they recently won an award of $2.86 million for unpaid overtime when a Tennessee court held they had been misclassified as executives.
The Salary or Fee Basis Rule. Second, even if you truly are a white collar employee under the overtime laws, you must be paid on a salary basis (often called the no docking rule) or the employer loses the exemption from owing overtime pay. For professionals and administrators, employers may also pay you on a fee basis. If you are not paid according to the strict salary or fee basis rules, the employer must pay you for your overtime even if you truly are a white collar employee. These rules are frequently violated leading to enormous potential overtime exposure.
To be on a salary basis means that an employee is paid a set amount each week regardless of the hours they work, with some narrow exceptions. In one recent case, Pharmacists at Wal-Mart, who would normally not receive overtime pay as professionals, were sometimes told to go home early when work was slack, and had their pay reduced as a result. A Colorado court held that the salary basis rule was violated and the Pharmacists were owed overtime. In another case, former Managers at an auto parts store had their pay subject to deductions for cash shortages. Once again, an Ohio court held that the salary basis rule was violated and awarded unpaid overtime to the Managers.
The fee basis rule is rather simple. It means you are paid a flat fee to do a task regardless of how long the task takes. In a recent case, a professional home care nurse, Wendy Elwell, who regularly worked 60 hours per week, won over $50,000 plus her attorney's fees when the court held that her compensation arrangement did not qualify for the fee basis rule because she was paid not only a set fee for home health care visits, but also additional compensation for lengthy visits.
Independent Contractors. Another area where misclassification commonly occurs is with independent contractors. If someone is under the control of the employer and not functioning as a true free lancer in business for herself, it is likely that she is really an employee, not an independent contractor. While contractors are not covered by overtime laws, employees sure are. In one recent case, a chauffeur at Bell Atlantic won an overtime award when the court ruled him to be an employee even though Bell Atlantic treated him like an independent contractor.
Overtime Remedies. Under federal law, an employee or ex-employee has two years to bring an overtime claim, three years for willful violations. Some states extend these times under their own overtime laws, and indeed grant broader overtime rights to employees than under federal law. Moreover, a successful employee will normally receive an award of DOUBLE their unpaid overtime, plus their attorney's fees in pursuing the claim.
In sum, just because you are white collar and paid on a salary does NOT mean that you should not receive overtime pay. Because sometimes you most certainly should.
Carl Khalil is a Virginia Beach, Virginia attorney and the founder of the website www.PayMyOvertime.com, which is devoted to helping employers and employees learn about their overtime rights and duties. Mr. Khalil is also the founder of www.BreakYourNonCompete.com, which has been featured on the NBC Today and in nationally syndicated career columns.
I'd likely be glad I had a job, let alone overtime... ;-)
CC-licensed translations of Japanese fiction: http://tonygonz.blogspot.com/
IT businesses in USA seem to be the western equivalent to Nike sweat shops. Why would you NOT get paid for spending the remaining hours of your already limited time off work? Here in the communist soviet nordic countries, and most civilized EU countries, you get paid 150% or 200% of the hourly wage. And before you start talking about bringing down companies to their knees by them actually paying their workers, last time I checked, the nordic software/tech companies are doing just fine. But here I guess the terrorists have already won or what?
Interesting concept. Most of the soft-e's I know are all full-time salaried employees, and thus exempt from overtime compensation. In fact, I've never seen a full-time position that was eligible for overtime unless it was union (then again, I haven't seen them all). In return, you get stuff like benefits, sick time, insurance, a steady check, etc.
Oh, and the 'be-thankful-you-have-a-job' crowd? Shut up. Just because you're unemployed and bitter doesn't mean that the rest of us who are working our asses off (and believe me, we are) aren't entitled to our employers following the established laws.
This is slightly off-topic, but it's related. A lot of the crap that goes on whether it be screwing employees out of pay, muddled decisions etc - it seems to me that it most often happens to companies that have publically traded stocks.
I work for a fairly large company ($80-100 million), but it is all privately held. They treat their employees with respect (for the most part, though bad managers tend to not be around for too long), have great benefits, pay overtime, heck they even spend a fair chunk of change on the Christmas party.
My theory is that companies like the one I work for, and others of similar size can work a lot better and can afford to treat their employees better if they so choose etc, because they are not tied into the tempests of the public stock exchange. They don't have share holders to constantly report too (well there are share holders, but all within the company). They don't have to worry about losing millions if a bad report comes out. All the money the company has is 'real'. Sure they didn't have the huge inlay of capital at first, but instead a solid business and careful spending, meant that eventually the company became quite profitable and more importantly, remains profitable.
Does this make any sense?
See here for some more information.
Yeah... Homework*1.5.
Follow me
The law exists to protect exployers from over working their employees. So why should a person making a high salary not have that protection? Personally I'd vote for the hourly limit to be 35 hours before overtime kicked in. Then maybe there wouldn't be so many unemployed people and people would get more time off (and less money of couse).
The journalist won and the newspaper got stuck paying 3 years of retroactive back overtime to all their employees. The key point in the case was that the "overtime" was mandatory. So that clause in your employment contract that you're a salaried employee might be worthless if your IT company requires overtime constantly. Might be worth consulting a lawyer, if that's the case.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
This is typically a catch 22 situation. Sure, if your employer doesn't pay you overtime even if he is required to by law, you're fucked either way. Or you don't make a point out of it, and get paid less than you deserve. Or, do make a point out of it, sue the guy, get your pay and leave your job. Because, face it, the boss is going to be pissed off about you taking him to court, and you're never going to be able to reestablish a normal working relationship with him. He'll get you in his own way, either buy making your life miserable or by looking for a reason to fire you, which he'll always be able to find.
The only reason to do really pursue the issue is to help your co-workers, because if you win the court case your employer would be crazy to risk other cases with the other employees, and if he has some brains in his head he'll start paying them overtime as he should. So, as some other poster already said, do this when you've found another job anyway, sue the guy for backpay, and leave your ex-co-workers with a nice present.
---
"The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
Riiight. This has worked so well in Europe. In many countries (Denmark and France, IIRC) they have rules like this and their unemployment is skyrocketing.
Between this and California's new "download tax" I guess they want to be sure no tech development EVER happens there again.
The part about computer professionals indicates the maximum wage for overtime has been raised to $43.58/hour (who came up with that number?). Here's the section about it:
(h) Except, as provided in subparagraph (i), an employee in the computer software field who is paid on an hourly basis shall be exempt, if all of the following apply:
(i) The employee is primarily engaged in work that is intellectual or creative and that requires the exercise of discretion and independent judgment.
(ii) The employee is primarily engaged in duties that consist of one or more of the following:
- 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, creation, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications.
- The documentation, testing, creation, or modification of computer programs related to the design of software or hardware for computer operating systems.
(iii) The employee is highly skilled and is proficient in the theoretical and practical application of highly specialized information to computer systems analysis, programming, and software engineering. A job title shall not be determinative of the applicability of this exemption.
(iv) The employee's hourly rate of pay is not less than forty-three dollars and fifty eight cents ($43.58). The Division of Labor Statistics and Research shall adjust this pay rate on October 1 of each year to be effective on January 1 of the following year by an amount equal to the percentage increase in the California Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers.
The reason you hear "be glad you have a job" so often is not a surprise: many Slashdotters are OUT OF WORK, and have been for a while. It's also the reason why those currently employed are scared to speak up: they think they'll have a hard time finding a new job, too.
The tech sector has a glut of qualified people; it's the law of supply and demand. Bad news for me, as I'm about to graduate with a degree in CS.
I'm glad you're employed, and I'm glad you won't take any crap from your employers. But you can afford to feel that way. I bet if you did get fired, you'd be able to find another job pretty quickly.
Have you read the Moderation Guidelines Addendum?
This is a long disorganized rant.
.. Are no longer "magical." The magic is gone folks, and they're just jobs now. Sorry to break this to you.
:)
I know what you think. Unions are for trades workers. Not so, ask a school teacher.
Historically in the U.S., unions were created to correct the horrible treatment of workers by large, overpowerful corporations during the robber-baron era circa 1920's and 1930's. The relevance of unions today has been questioned by big business, citing numerous government regulations that work to protect employees from hazards in the workplace, discrimination, work hours, etc. What these government regulations don't protect you from is being treated like shit by companies that cut hours, push for unpaid overtime, cut perks, cut staffing, cut benefits - All while operating profitably.
We live in an age when companies are reclaiming the type of power not seen since the 1920's. Where we have robber-barons. CEO's that cut jobs to improve stock performance while taking $10 million dollar bonus packages.
It works both ways, of course. There are tradeoffs. But I.T. is becomming a basic commoditiy to employers. Don't stroke your ego. While the Slashdot readership may be a clever barrel of monkeys - Inteligent, highly innovative and/or intelligent - The jobs you perform as programmers, sysadmins, network engineers, etc.
I've always been anti-union. But that was before the dot-com bubble burst. I was working at an ISP a few months ago. I had a guy with a Masters' degree and two certifications walk in our door looking for a job. At an ISP.
My fiance' is Swedish. In Europe, almost all jobs are protected by government regulations or unions. You -can- fire someone for poor job performance, but it requires a review process. Not the whim of an asshole manager playing office politics.
Large companies don't like unions. Collective bargaining gives employees power. Review boards investigating alleged employee peformance problems or misconduct puts employees on the same level as management during administrative issues. Employees are no longer drones to be dumped on by management. Peter will in fact NOT work this saturday, Bob.
Did you know that the Teamsters is trying to unionize nursing staff in hospitals across the country? Why? Because hospitals are mistreating nurses. Underpaid, overworked, and being replaced by cheaper H1-B labor.
I'm out of rant for now. Discuss amongst yourselves.
THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
I work as an office equipment repairman (copier tech.). We have been told quite clearly that the company will not pay OT. But we are still to meed the call load and be working (call into the the auto-dispatch) by 07:30 and on the job at 17:00.
I have been told that to make my stats (required workload) that I need to do what the other techs do and work through lunch. Or, if hungry, to go through a drive-through and eat in my car in-route. That is an hour that they are TELLING me to give them right there.
On the other end of the day we are to be at a account at 17:00. If any of you have ever watched a copier tech work you would realize the being at work at 17:00 means finishing about 17:30-17:45. That extra time is all unpaid. The theory is that we get comp time but it is pretty clear that requesting comp time would be a bad idea. The companies often reply that summers are slow so we are not logging a full eight hours during those months, as if it is our problem that they cannot come up with a steady workload.
The management answer is real simple, "If you think you can do better somewhere else then go there." All this for $10usd/hour (and don't even get me going on auto reimbursement). No need to say, "go back to school." I have a B.A. (as do about 1/5 of techs. The number of new hires with degrees is increasing (or should that be,without degrees laid off). I am going back to finish my masters, not so much as that I feel it will improve my situation as for something to do.
In general we need unions but the unions will not even talk to us. I was part of an effort that tried to interest the unions in copier techs nd the response was that if we were not members of a union then they could (would) do nothing. Having my minor in H.R. I know that there are too many pitfalls for people who try to unionize on their own.
Basicly it is an exploitive situation that ignores labor law. And yes, I am looking for another job
There are two classifications, exempt and non-exempt employees. Non-exempt employees are subject to all rules of overtime, lunch breaks, etc. Exempt employees are considered to be management/professional positions, who are scheduled and paid by their projects, obligations, deliverables, etc.
There are usually a set of criteria to determine what jobs/positions fall into what category. These may be specific, or a set of questions to determine the predominant characteristics. It appears that CA has a particular definition around $41/hr for coding.
The first thing is to firmly determine whether you fit into the non-exempt category. Do this outside of your employer's oversight. If you are exempt, get back to getting your deliverables in on time.
If you are non-exempt, and getting abused (i.e., working overtime w/o pay, usually including >8h/day OR 40h/week), you now have a decision to make. The first thing to do in any case is to make a DETAILED and ACCURATE LOG (don't inflate it).
With some logged data, you can bring an action. Speak to an attorney specializing in labor law, and who has experience in litigation.
One MAJOR question is WHEN to bring the action. Find out the statute of limitations. You may be able to go over a year and bring action later, i.e., when you find a new job, or are ready to leave. This has the major advantage of not subjecting you to retaliation (e.g., firing, demotion, etc.). Do not take much comfort in the anti-retaliation clauses in the law. Saying it is one thing, proving it is another, especially in these climates when layoffs are common, and they won't be hiring replacements. They can make any excuse, and you will have great difficulty and expense proving otherwise.
So learn your stuff, document everything, plan your tactics, and Good Luck!
It's this exact attitude by employers that caused me to start my own business. I have worked for people who had respect for me, and I've worked for people who are like this Anonymous Coward who posted this troll.
"Your value to the company must exceed your cumulative cost, and by a large factor. Otherwise you are expendable. Bitch, and that adds to the cumulative cost. Bitch some more and you are gone. No questions asked."
If you want slaves instead of employees, leave the country, now, please. We don't want you here.
The company I recently told to get bent used to respect their employees. They switched to an attitude like yours, and they've been losing clients ever since.
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
I'm a Bank of America employee in Chicago, and we're starting to feel this.
BofA is now paying all programmers & System Administrators in California overtime. This is in accordance to a class action law suit brought against the company by past/present employees. BofA actually had to pay back-pay plus a penalty. This includes compensation for "On Call" time when admins have to carry a pager, or are called in on an emergency.
California's law is kinda screwy also, since overtime is defined as any hours > 8 in a day. So BofA had to cancel all flex time (work 10 hours M-Th, get half day Friday) and has implimented time logging for all of us. Not quite punch cards, but quite possibly soon.
In Chicago, we've been told to not work *any* overtime until we are informed as to our new status. It's looking like Managers will not be getting OT, but everyone else will.
Our biggest concern is what effect this is going to have on our employment situation. BofA is actively using off-shore programing sources, and this is just another reason for the executives to justify sending all the programming work to India.
<Rant On>
This is just another nail in the coffin. Stupid-assed labor laws like this are really going to kill this country.
</Rant On>
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:
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.)
--
bachiatari na torisetsu o yome!
The relevance of unions today has been questioned by big business, citing numerous government regulations that work to protect employees from hazards in the workplace, discrimination, work hours, etc. What these government regulations don't protect you from is being treated like shit by companies that cut hours, push for unpaid overtime, cut perks, cut staffing, cut benefits - All while operating profitably.
The plight of the poor, put-upon IT worker making five times minimum wage with benefits, with his fat ass in a safe office chair instead of a coal mine? Nope, doesn't resonate.
I've always been anti-union. But that was before the dot-com bubble burst. I was working at an ISP a few months ago. I had a guy with a Masters' degree and two certifications walk in our door looking for a job.
And how the *fuck* is unionizing going to keep your dot-com parent company going to keep from going under? The problem today is not companies making shitloads of profit and exploiting their workers more (a la coal magnates). The problem is that the *companies* are doing badly. You can't just squeeze the company and get more money from it, and make everything fine. The people at dot-coms, American Airlines, Enron, WorldCom, AOL, etc, are just going to have a rough time of it. There isn't a nice way to say it.
In Europe, almost all jobs are protected by government regulations or unions. You -can- fire someone for poor job performance, but it requires a review process.
Nothing like red tape to solve problems! Look and see how many people in Sweden would like to live in the US versus how many people in the US would like to live in Sweden.
Not the whim of an asshole manager playing office politics.
Politics will *never* leave the workplace. Even by adding red tape.
Collective bargaining gives employees power.
Unions also tend (unless you have a single-company union, formed of the employees at a single company) to be designed purely to put money in the pocket of *another* large, self-interested organization with a deep love for taking money from those who need it -- AFL/CIO.
Because hospitals are mistreating nurses. Underpaid, overworked, and being replaced by cheaper H1-B labor.
You want to *unionize* to keep companies from replacing workers with foreign workers and moving jobs overseas?
May we never see th
This is slightly off-topic, as I am a technician, not a programmer.
Well, I made over $41/hour working for my last employer (quite a bit more, actually, all things considered, viewed from a 40 hour work week perspective). At my last job, my title was "Vice President of Technical Services". But, I can say that overtime *should* be paid, regardless, and here is why:
My last job (2 years ago): In return for a great salary, plus a company vehicle for my work and personal use and full health insurance benefits, I worked anywhere from 60 - 80 hours per week, 7 days a week, and holidays.
At the time, I thought it was worth it: I was the "star" employee, first technician hired, bright, motivated - all the other techs came to me for help, and as a result, they could successfully complete their service calls with my assistance, thereby benefitting the customers and the company. My customers loved me, and I was happy doing what I loved to do.
For awhile, I enjoyed being "it", and thought that the time I spent working was the natural result of my skills and experience, and the need for my company to make money to offset my salary and benefits.
Now, I realize that I was wrong. I almost always billed enough time, directly or indirectly, during a normal business week, to justify my remuneration. The late nights, weekends and holidays were just "gravy" for my employer, since I was never paid for any of that time.
Weekend server migrations/upgrades (to save downtime for the customer, of course!): Billed at full rates by my employer ($95/hour at the time). LAN/WAN infrastructure improvements, the same.
Was I being compensated well? Absolutely. Was it worth the time spent? In my opinion, in retrospect, no.
At any given point, ALL of the time I spent beyond a standard work week was at my personal expense, just extra money generated for my employer. Over time, it became expected of me, and I bought into it, for years, as the price for employment, for being "good" at what I do. To my shame, I demanded the same from all of my technicans as well.
Training? Forget about it! My last boss wouldn't authorize training during business hours. If I wanted to learn, I did it on my own time. He would graciously pay for certification tests, but God forbid I should fail the first time.
Sadly, it has been my experience over the past 15+ years that this is the paradigm for all small-medium sized service companies, especially those owned privately. The technicians are merely cash cows to be milked. Technicians around here (Upstate New York) are salaried, not because they are being paid higher than normal, generally, but to save on overtime.
When I was fired from my last job (officially for "having been late for no compelling reason after having been previously warned" - tell me that a VP that sets his own hours can be late?!?), I set off on my own. I've done well over the past 2 years, and, when I needed additional help, I hired good technicians as subcontractors, and paid them the lion's share of their billable time (85/15 split - they get the 85 percent, after all, they are doing the work). I'm not getting rich by so doing, but I sleep well at night.
Over time, what I've come to realize is this: Money is a good thing, but money earned to the detriment of others ("greed") is not. The vast majority of managers, executives, etc. that have never been in the trenches, possess no technical skills to any great degree, view we geeks as chattel. The phrase "human capital" has been mentioned in the IT trade mags of late (notably in InfoWorld) - it underscores the problem, the perception that we geeks are merely plug-in components of a company's technical prowess, to be used, discarded and replaced at whim.
So, to wrap this up - Sure, $41/hour is a lot of money, but at what cost to the person earning it? If that person works 60 hours per week, salaried, what was once $41/hour becomes about $27/hour, and lessens with every additional hour worked, to the employee's detriment, NOT to the employer's.
So, I think that overtime, generally, is a good thing: It uses the motivation of management to generate revenue as a brake: The more we geeks work, the more the employer has to pay. It is a perfect example of negative feedback in its truest sense, and removes the incentive on the part of the greedy to exploit us egregiously.
Just my opinion.
dj
I've always felt overtime was factored in to my salaray. If I wanted a 40 hour work week with paid overtime, then I'd expect to make a lot less than I make now as a base salary. That's one reason programmer salaries are so high. You want $100K per year AND overtime pay? Get real.
Let's say you make $40/hour. Thats $80k/year with a 40 hour work week. Instead, let's say you average 50 hours a week. That's $32/hour. So - really you are making $32/hour with a guaranteed 10 hours a week in overtime.
If that doesn't seem like a sweet deal to you, I'm sure the guys working for a lot less than that aren't exactly shedding tears for us.
Please note I'm posting this anonymously as I don't want to be singled out from my old company. (Oh, and of course, IANAL.)
The old company that I worked for required us to work 80 hrs/wk, 7 days/wk for 6 month. I (and most of my co-workers) got pretty fed up with this, so we started looking into California State law.
The law that is being referred to does seem to indicate that MOST IT proffessionals should get paid overtime.
In English, the law says that if you are paid less than 41 dollars per hour, (that is, your weekly salary divided by 40 is less than 41 dollars), than you should be paid overtime (515). However, you are exempt as a computer programmer if you are a senior level engineer. (515.5)
As I and my coworkers were all qualified as junior -mid level programmers, we went and saw a labor attorney. He told us that we had a very strong case, and that we would almost certainly win a dispute against the company. He said that there has been very little case law testing this new statute, and we would be breaking new ground. We're still deciding whether to continue with the case or not. So far, I personally have been duped out of about 25K in overtime.
Hope this clears it up for people.
I work for A Very Large Game Company and we've encountered this very situation. One engineer discovered this regulation and went to management to request his fair due.
Their response? They flatly denied we were owed it. And since they have way more lawyers (and money) than we do, we basically have to take it, or walk. (The guy in question left, rather than continue to put up with it. I'm still here, but bitter as hell.)
I'm told that a class-action lawsuit could be a possibility, but only if we can get enough people together to form the minimum "class size", and that seems unlikely to happen, since everyone is fearful of losing their jobs (laws forbidding retribution notwithstanding). If anyone knows of a way to gather Screwed Game Developers together to form a class-action group, speak up.
The ironic side note is that, though my stated salary is over the "exempt" limit if you figure it based on 40 hours per week, I'm below that limit if you figure it on *actual* hours worked over the past year. Sigh...
(And yeah, I'm posting anonymously, for fairly obvious reasons.)
I've worked for several large companies and a couple of small ones. I've always left one job on my own for a better one. I've always worked on salary (i.e. 40 hours a week), even when contracting. In all instances I have found that from time to time upper management sets unrealistic goals that cannot be met without overtime. Very seldom do I work more than 40 hours a week so from time to time upper management finds that the deadlines were missed and they learn not to overestimate timelines otherwise *they* risk embarisment. Its usually not a big deal. A Friday deadline may be pushed back to Tuesday or Wednessday of the next week.
If I set a deadline then I will try to meet it by working some extra during the week (never on weekends though) because I feel that since I set the timeline (and unlike upper management am qualified to estimate programming timelines) I am somewhat obligated to meet it. If the schedule is held up by external factors though (usually the case) then the deadline gets pushed back appropriatly.
I always let management know the progress of the project.
Now, this isn't to say I won't work a 10 or 12 hour day. I may indeed do that for various reasons, usually because I am "in the zone" coding wise. But, I always try to make up for it by leaving early or coming in late other days of the week. Sometimes a very long lunch will easily make up for it.
Lastly, I try to keep my time sheets consistant. Always right around 40 hours and always around 8 hours a day. Even if I do put in a 10 hour day one day and a 6 the next I just even it out to 8 and 8.
Now they don't even call it "Human Resources" - they call it HR.
They've removed even the Human part of it. You are just a single letter.
I just wonder how long until they rename it "MeatWare Exploitation"
www.eFax.com are spammers
Hmm, I guess you didn't read my entire post. I was fired - and I now make quite a bit more money working on my own than I did while working for someone else.
But, my point was this (and perhaps it was lost in the whole "$41/hour" idea):
Regardless of how much an employer pays a person per hour, or flat rate, there comes a point when they should pay overtime, whether that person is salaried or not.
Salaries should not used by employers to allow them to exploit employees, regardless of the salary, within reason. If an employee is worth, for example, $41/hour, to the employer,on a salaried basis (which is based upon a 40 hour work week) then why should they not be worth more when the employee is working past standard business hours? After all - they deemed his/her time/skill/experience/expertise sufficient to pay them that amount in the first place. Refusing overtime beyond a standard work week or a bit more (generally 10-15 hours/week) (or commensurate perks in the form of personal time, etc.) simply on the basis of "we pay you enough already" is tantamount to slavery: It indicates an attitude on the part of management that the employee's personal time has no value.
And that, IMHO, is one the things that is wrong with corporate America - the view that a salaried employee should be bound to work as long as is deemed necessary for no additional money, simply because they are salaried, and so, by "definition", are already being paid "more than enough" in their estimation.
Somewhere along the line - salaried has come to mean "enslaved" - a salaried employee feels obligated to work far beyond reasonable hours, simply because of their status as a salaried employee. In so doing, they give up their personal time to the company, to its benefit and to their detriment.
I am not against salaries, when working for employers that appreciate their salaried employees, and understand that it is, and should be, a balanced relationship.
I was a salaried employee for nearly 20 years, despite the fact that my jobs (field tech, etc.), aren't generally deemed to be salaried positions. Generally, I thought my remuneration worth the extra time I spent working, and was happy to do so, knowing that I was helping my company by billing extra time.
At my last job, I realized that it was being used to exploit my skills solely to benefit my employer.
And that is what I am against, most especially in a service industry: If an employer charges hourly for a service person, then they should not be allowed to pay that person a flat rate salary. That invites abuse.
Never having been a professional programmer, I cannot say whether or not the latter should apply. But, I can say this, in general: Salary is not an excuse to require people to work far beyond a standard work week to their detriment.
Just my opinion.
dl
This article sums up the experiences of a lot of the posters here so far...
http://www.3feetunder.com/krick/jobsucks.htm
I rescued it off of the original Shift.com website.
There is a lot of talk in this thread about legally calling employers on their compensation bluffs.
Maybe I'm naive, but I always thought that prior employee references is critical factor in getting a new job, especially for less experienced developers with less than a handful of work history entries. If I buck the system, I won't be able to get a good reference, right? Won't that hurt my ability to get a new job?
Can less experienced developers afford to fight back against exploitation, or are we just stuck?
It kinda comes down to this. If you believe that employers will not screw their employees to make a profit, and that those employees could "just find another job"; then you also believe that these laws are a bad idea. However, if you believe that employers will screw their employees at the drop of a hat for a profit, then you want protection laws.
There is a balance somewhere. In the U.S. there have been MANY instances where employers have screwed their employees, and that has lead to child labor laws and unions. Unfortunately quite a few lazy people seem to want to take advantage of companies. The real problem is greed.
I kinda laugh at some of the companies around here that talk about "retirement" benifits. Yeah RIGHT!
I saw many times Dow Chemical move "older" employees around the country when they started to get close to retirement. They tried hard to get them to quit... I could go on.... Like how the automotive industry actually killed people who wanted to start up a union... But on the other hand I see union auto workers today that make a slug look like the greatest worker in the world...
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
Exempt status is one of the absolute worst things ever invented. Especially in Arizona, where the labor laws are a joke.
Until about a month ago, I worked for an international technology provider for the hotel industry. ALL of their salaried employees are exempt, and their salaries started at about $20,000 a year. My job as a Business Support Analyst frequently required me to work overtime, sometimes working 80 hours in a week. In the month before I left, I was expected to work several 24 hour shifts, due to contracts we had made that we could not keep.
Exempt status seems to be a license for slavery. It's the reason I left the company. $24,000 a year is a laughable sum of money for the expectations that were placed upon us. Unfortunately, I'm now one of the masses of people scrambling to find work.
i'm the jedidiahmarkfoster your parents warned you about
I was a member of the IWW tech workers union in San Francisco. The IWW was founded as a response to the evils of trade unionism. Back in the early 1900s, people realized that corrupt unions were worse than no unions. In the IWW, there is only one paid position, the elected head of the union. Everyone else is volunteer. Dues are paid directly to the union, never taken directly from your check.
The IWW was the second union in the world with a web presence, second only to the Isreali Teacher's Union. I helped the IWW with the first cyber picket of Border's Books, when crackers we assume were hired by Border's attempted to take down our servers. Better than the old days, when companies hired the Pinkertons to kill union organizers...
Today, many unions are large beauracracies whose sole apparant purpose is to fatten beauracrats pockets. Union organizers cut deals with management to the detriment of the workers. Big unions sometimes ignore the plight of workers at smaller companies because there isn't much publicity in fighting those small battles.
But the idea of unions, that is, a bunch of little guys getting together to stand up to the big guy, that still makes sense. On a truely level playing field, in a true free market, maybe unions would be irrelevant. As long as business owners have all the power, while the working people who create the actual wealth in the world have very little, unions will be an important way to keep things a little more even.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
You remind me of Mr. Burns when his employees went on strike. "FINE! I'll just run the company by myself!"
You sound every bit as whiny as the Generation X'ers you're complaining about. "I shouldn't have to pay people overtime, they make enough already! I shouldn't have to listen to my employee's complaints, so I'll just hire people who don't complain."
You make some great points in there. Employers and employees owe it to each other to be fair to each other. But your points are undermined by the way you try to make them. Thanks to you, a good many readers are even more inclined to think of their employers as heartless bastards who would rather fire them than give them a cent above what they absolutely must.
I like my job. I'm very happy with it. But if I asked for a raise, or for overtime, and got a speech like this in response, I would be out the door right then.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!