Slashdot Mirror
IT Workers Not Eligible for Overtime in New Rules
bjarvis354 writes "The San Diego Union Tribune is reporting that the Department of Labor Secretary Elaine Chao unveiled new rules that seem to specifically target IT workers and other white collar workers for exemption from overtime pay. The Oneonta Daily Star claims that 'According to new exemption tests, the employee isn't guaranteed overtime pay if primary duties involve office or non-manual work,' and 'Computer employees are not guaranteed overtime pay if they make $455 a week, or if their hourly rate is $27.63. Affected employees include computer systems analysts, programmers, software engineers or anyone with a similar title.'"
Workers may still get overtime pay if they earn between $23,660 and $100,000 and work more than 40 hours per week.
I don't want to hear any complaints if your making over 100k a year. If your making less thank 23,660 a year I'm confused too.
$455 a week is $23,660 yearly.
$27.63 an hour is $57,470 yearly, which is already close to Federal overtime exemption (if not hitting it exactly, I don't recall the current figure).
So, why the $34,000 discrepancy?
This is true. I received overtime until last year when I got an "offer" to go salary. I cant complain, they took my previous years base pay + all the over time I made and added an additional $15k/year and asked if I would go salary for that. Thinking "Hell yes!", I said "Hmmm... sounds reasonable -- let me talk it over with my family". Took the offer, of course.
With a few exectpions, I can walk out on my job at the drop of a hat and pick up where I left off in the evening. Of course, there's the off 2am page/alert that has me up and at work -- or once I had to walk out of an amusement park and return to work -- but it's a fair trade, imho (and MINE is all that matters to me).
-jhon
Well, I work for a tech company, and they expect me to work sixty hours a week too... the only difference is that I don't. I work the forty. At 5pm, I get up, pack my computer, and leave.
It's that simple. I'm not getting paid overtime, so I'm not doing overtime. Granted, I'm "on call" once every other week, so I get woken up sometimes, but frankly, I just don't understand why people think they have to do that extra 20 hours. Do they give you more money? Do they come over and help clean your apartment? No. So why do it for them?
They are providing you a job, and as long as you do that job, then "expectations" are just that.
libertarianswag.com
I've worked for 17 years in the IT field, and all but three of those years have been as a "salaried" employee.
If I am "salaried", why do I have to fill out a timesheet? Why, when I only have 38 hours on my timesheet, do I get paid for 38 hours? Conversely, when I have 68 hour, I only get paid for 40?
I've brought this up as "illegal" on a couple occasions, and even cited the state's labour laws, only to have it thrown back at me.
THIS is where we need to make some reforms too...
With regards to this, i have a question.
Lately there have been couple of articles on slashdot and basically satated that most of the computer work these days is not really "white collar" (I dont like these terms presonally).
So if one looks at other jobs around alot of workers are unionized eg, airline pilots/mechanics, auto workers etc etc.
Is there a union for computer professionals?
If so which one I havent found one, if not why not?
We talk all high minded on slashdot thousands times a day every day 365 days a year. Is it all talk or do people here think that a Computer Professionals union is needed these days?
Reminds me of the rumored Microsoft tactic of hiring two people for one job, with the knowledge that one of them would be fired at the end of the first year. The result is that the two would end up working many hours of unpaid overtime that management doesn't even have to ask for in order to get ahead of their rival.
I'm not quite sure that's the kind of environment where I'd want to struggle to keep the job...
Capitalism is a positive sum game. While I certainly disagree with that statement, in this case it makes sense. When Unions fight for extra rights, then employers who are unecessarily hoarding all that cash are forced to give some of it away. This helps out everyone in the economy (except for a very small, very wealthy group). Unions are positive sum. When a Union struggles and wins extra rights, all workers benefit. The idea that somehow by forcing employers to take care of their employees and pay them a living wage will destory the market is ridiculous. We all benefit when society consists of people that are paid well, healthy, and happy. Perhaps you would like to go back to the early 20th century when children were worked 14+ hour days, and people were treated like machines (oh, wait, that second one hasn't changed much). If it weren't for Unions, chances are that you would be working a miserable, low wage job, and the country would be entirely in the pockets of the rich by now. You have quite a bit to be grateful for, it's too bad that you don't realize it.
Just to throw my personal perspective into the mix. I am also a salaried employee and currently, I *do* get overtime. I have a union contract that defines many conditions where I am paid OT as a supervisor. I work past those limits, I get an extra 1/6th of my salary (our work week is defined as a 6 day week).
The men and women who I supervise are hourly get ~$30/hour and get OT as well.
In closing: IMHO Unions are good.
I'm not exactly sure where all of the anti-union bias comes from. Screenwriters and actors have a union, and they are also well-paid (most of the time) and creative people.
I also think that the argument that we can negotiate our own contracts is equally naive. Sure, there are some that can, but I wouldn't say that social skills and negotiation are well-known geek skills outside of MMRPGs.
The only disadvantage of unions, as was eluded to earlier was the whole factor of diverse employment. However, that doesn't bar places like MS, Apple, Sun, Adobe, IBM, etc., etc., from joining unions. This doesn't mean people sit on their buts while unions continually strike, but it does mean you have someone negotiating your benefits and work week for you, collectively, as well as a network of peers.
I belong to the National Union of Journalists in the UK. They issue press cards, but also do uniony things, like get discounts for buying Macs, insurance deals, bitching about certain companies. If you think programmers are a diverse and egocentric bunch, you should really spend some time with journalists. The union here covers editors, TV folks, photographers, staffers, freelancers, and reporters from tech to gardening to celebrities to war.
Sounds like a variation on the Prisoners' Dilemma.
I wonder if the alleged Microsoft managers actually understood the strategy.
That's when he pointed out a fair percentage of people in the work world are in their forties, are too experienced to the point of being overqualified for many jobs (to make a change), are set enough in their ways they can't adapt to something roughly similar to their current skill set, and don't have enough experience to move up (the Peter Principle[1]). Bottom line? They're waiting for the next 20-30 years to pass by so they can retire.
:)
Well, by that measure, the logical thing for managers to do is to let go of everyone over 40; overqualified, inflexible, chairwarmers waiting for the next thirty years to retire.
And that's exactly what they are doing. Firing people over 35 and hiring young inexperienced people.
Points:
How can you be overqualified and at the same time inflexible? If you are more than qualified for the job, how could you have been inflexible?
Where exactly are YOU planning to work when you are forty? I assume you are a IT/Comp Sci/Engineering type. The professor's pointmakes sense to you now, because you are young (another guess). What are you planning on doing when you are useless? Will you be overqualifed and yet have spent two decades becoming too inflexible to learn new techniques? If you are the exception, why assume everyone else will be the lump you won't be?
And the fastball: how old was the old, inflexible professor? Over 35? Where does he work? I'm thinking he's too old and tired to be employable at his advanced stage in life.So why listen to his unemployable brain? If he is working, at his sad time of life, then where's he getting off making such a comment? If he isn't working in the private sector today, in his golden years, then how does he justify teaching you? He's just as superannuated and untrainable as the old professionals he's dismissing.
**
I was watching Leo LaPorte interview Kevin Mitnick (37+)on TechTV's The Screen Savers a month ago. Kevin,old hacker that he is, has started a security company. Wrote his own code to test the security of networks.
My recollection of a bit of it:
Leo's question: who wrote the code? An old guy like you can't be doing it, right?
Kevin (slightly off-balance): Um, I wrote it.
Leo: But you can't be up to date with all the stuff that's happened in the last few years?
Kevin (a little stunned): Well, I do read books...
**
It's sad, this meme. Almost all the yunguns here on Slashdot posting today will be olduns in ten years. Am I listening to a giant asssemblage of soon-to-be irrelevant fossils?
Maybe it's the old chicken-and-egg syndrome. Older IT workers stop trying because they know that they won't be taken seriously anymore because they don't play the Star Wars RPG at lunch with the other workers, or can't go bar hopping with the gang after work? (yup. speaking from observation at work).
Is it fossilization of the brain, which isn't physiologically possible at the ancient age of 40 -you're at your peak, really - or is it the simple prejudice of the management and the younger workers themselves that set the stage for the demise of the 35+ year old's career?
Not idle questions. A lot of are hitting that wall now.
(My opinion, for what's it's worth, etc: you lose that learning edge when you get married and have kids. Life takes up too much time to spare 20 hours a day learning and coding. Unmarried guys tend to hang in longer.
You also can just get tired of the politics and the endless staring at a screen.
It's not brain death, or inflexibilty. It's about becoming MORE flexible, acquiring more interests, like girls and national politics. And maybe just about requiring more sleep
Why don't we just tell the government to get their damn hands out of it in the first place?
I have a salaried job now that doesn't get me overtime. I have had hourly contract jobs in the past that don't give overtime, but pay for the actual hours worked.
Shifting from contract jobs to a salaried position meant that I had a significant paycut and unpaid overtime (like everyone else in the field), but it offered stability.
If you want to be compensated for working more than 40 hours, do it at a different job or get it into your contract.
Ten (unordered) Rules for Success:
1. Know your shit. If you're a sysadmin who can't make an Ethernet cable or a programmer who can't build a workstation, you deserve to be at the mercy of others.
2. Know others' shit. You just gonna sit there while the PFY brings down the intranet?
3. Be your word. Every discrepancy between what you say and what you do will be used against you. This does not mean that your word must be intelligible to anyone but you. Make credible threats and follow through.
4. Incompetents must fear you, whether they work above you, with you, or below you.
5. Everyone is your adversary until proven otherwise. This does not mean you should be on the offensive, but you can't let your guard down. Trust no one with your reputation.
6. Take no shit, give shit only when your case is strong. It's hard to implement (4) without giving shit, but your aim had better be true. Sometimes it's better to bide your time.
7. Make no friends in haste. Lunch is ok but never, never go drinking with an incompetent. It just makes it harder to fire them later (*sob* I thought we were friends!).
8. Be humble. The more bad-ass you say you are, the more the probability of us having a drink approaches zero.
9. Carry your own insurance and retirement, even if you are on salary. It's so easy to walk out the door when your benefits are secure, and they know it. Don't forget to negotiate for extra compensation!
10. Punctuality. Some deserve it, some don't. Learn the difference.
"Is it fossilization of the brain, which isn't physiologically possible at the ancient age of 40 -you're at your peak, really -"
Even at 40, you're probably not at your peak yet, unless you choose to be.
There's been a number of myths about this for way too long. People point to scientists such as Einstein, ignoring the Maxwelloids and Lord Kelvenites who did some of their best work after 40, or occasionally 60. Buckminster Fuller was famous enough to pose at age 40 for a bust commemorating his career in 1929, but practically everything he is now noted for he did after that. The same sort of examples can be cited for art and music (Look at what Bach did after 40). I'm citing mostly historical figures because, if anything modern medicine is making the chance of outstanding performance in later life grater and greater.
Meanwhile, some people ignore counter-evidence of rather obvious kinds. (For example, the US Army is generally a young man's game for purely physical reasons, but they grant hundreds of age wavers to keep talented people over age 60 in every year. These are people being kept primarily for their mental skills, and who are also willing to work hard enough at keeping up their physical abilities to not be knocked out for not being able to do 50 push ups on a test before they are even eligible for a waver - obviously that's a lot more selective a pool than in the tech industry, where a diabetic or wheelchair bound person is unlikely to be rejected on those grounds before they even get rejected for age biases).
Who is John Cabal?
I just came off a contract as a software engineer at a subsidiary of a Fortune 500 insurance company. The management, apparently, does not believe your statements about reduced productivity when you work too many hours in a week. All the full time (hence salaried) engineers were working well over 80 hour weeks. They would keep track of the number of hours these salaried employees worked. One of my co-workers put in over 90 hours one week and was not even in the top 10 for number of hours worked. This went on for months. If a union is required to stop this insanity, I say unionize. Those poor schlubs were beat and ill-tempered almost all the time and I can tell you they made a lot more mistakes than they should have.