Slashdot Mirror
US Senator Proposes Bill To Eliminate Overtime For IT Workers
New submitter Talisman writes "Kay Hagan (D) from North Carolina has introduced a bill to the Senate that would eliminate overtime pay for IT workers."
The bill is targeted at salaried IT employees and those whose hourly rate is $27.63 or more. It seems comprehensive in its description of what types of IT work qualify — everything from analysis and consulting to design and development to training and testing. The bill even uses "work related to computers" as one of the guidelines.
3 of the 4 co-sponsors for the bill are republican:
Michael Bennet [D-CO]
Scott Brown [R-MA]
Michael Enzi [R-WY]
John Isakson [R-GA]
I should have known bennet would be there. I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM! He's a bozo!
I take no responsibility for what I say. Even though I'm never wrong
I'll admit it ... I voted for her in 2008. Won't make that mistake again in 2014.
That bill doesn't impact me; I'm salaried and already classified as Exempt. But I know a lot of hourly folks, both full-time (like help desk, etc.) and consultants that this would negatively impact.
If you want a good job vote this man OUT!
I think you mean, "vote this woman OUT".
Sure looks like...
nobody voted for him, he was appointed to replace salazar
The bill is short so below is the full text from thomas.loc.gov. For a congressional bill it is surprisingly readable.
To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to modify provisions relating to the exemption for computer systems analysts, computer programmers, software engineers, or other similarly skilled workers.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Computer Professionals Update Act' or the `CPU Act'.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938.
Section 13(a)(17) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(a)(17)) is amended to read as follows:
`(17) any employee working in a computer or information technology occupation (including, but not limited to, work related to computers, information systems, components, networks, software, hardware, databases, security, internet, intranet, or websites) as an analyst, programmer, engineer, designer, developer, administrator, or other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is--
`(A) the application of systems, network or database analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine or modify hardware, software, network, database, or system functional specifications;
`(B) the design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, securing, configuration, integration, debugging, modification of computer or information technology, or enabling continuity of systems and applications;
`(C) directing the work of individuals performing duties described in subparagraph (A) or (B), including training such individuals or leading teams performing such duties; or
`(D) a combination of duties described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), the performance of which requires the same level of skill;
who is compensated at an hourly rate of not less than $27.63 an hour or who is paid on a salary basis at a salary level as set forth by the Department of Labor in part 541 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations. An employee described in this paragraph shall be considered an employee in a professional capacity pursuant to paragraph (1).'.
Time to offend someone
Red Hat is out of NC, Cisco has a few offices in NC as well. I have met a few IT workers from that area and they seem to get treated worse then the ones around the NYC metro area do.
How does this make sense for govn't.. isn't this a Private sector issue?
I have worked my way up from Network Tech to Director of IS... so I made the switch from hourly (non-exempt) to salary (exempt) and since then have had to deal with who is and isn't exempt.
It all comes down to what positions are considered "professional". My take on the subject has usually been that if the employee has the type of work that is difficult to measure and determine if they are truly working hard or stretching it out, then they are exempt. Exempt employees are expected to know what amount of work is truly needed and get things done in the least effort possible.
As a competent sys-admin, do you need to parse all 100MB of that log to determine the root cause of the error? How exactly does the boss know you did or didn't need to (yes a competent manager should have a clue, but it's more difficult than you think). Programming is the same way... I could hack it and get it out in a week, or be so damn picky it takes a year.
My position has usually been that people in these positions are able to determine what level of work is need to satisfy customer demand and not do unnecessary work. BUT, it is always a judgement call with IT. If you get it wrong, make a guy salary, make him work 60 hours to get a project out and he then sues, you can be held liable for back pay.
It is a difficult balance between leaving grey areas (because a lot of it is grey), and the government formally defining who is and isn't exempt. I would not immediately defame the Senator introducing the bill... they may actually be trying to do a good thing for employees. This is a messy area of personnel issues, and if they are successful in bringing clarity, all will benefit.
Technically it means that they are no longer required to pay overtime, but realistically how many employers in a down economy where there is a surplus of workers will do more than they are required to.
Time to offend someone
That's the law. Seriously, it is the law. Passed in 2003 amazingly enough.
The Califronia gov't description is the most clear. There is a Federal one too that is more difficult to read through but spells it out: IT workers get Overtime. Period.
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/FAQ_overtime.htm
And Amen again. I worked at a high profile startup that went defect back during the dot.com days, working 60 to 100 hour weeks. I never got a penny of the back pay they owed me, and the guy who worked most of those hours with me died three years later from congestive heart failure caused by stress (he had an otherwise healthy lifestyle). So this isn't just about the quality of your life; it could mean the difference between life and death.
Also it is currently in the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee so if one of the following is your senator you might want to contact them to have it killed:
Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Barbara A. Mikulski (D-MD)
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
Patty Murray (D-WA)
Bernard Sanders (I) (I-VT)
Robert P. Casey, Jr. (D-PA)
Kay R. Hagan (D-NC)
Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
Al Franken (D-MN)
Michael F. Bennet (D-CO)
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
Michael B. Enzi (R-WY)
Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
Rand Paul (R-KY)
Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT)
John McCain (R-AZ)
Pat Roberts (R-KS)
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Mark Kirk (R-IL)
Time to offend someone
CURRENT LAW:
(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.
NEW BILL:
(17) any employee working in a computer or information technology occupation (including, but not limited to, work related to computers, information systems, components, networks, software, hardware, databases, security, internet, intranet, or websites) as an analyst, programmer, engineer, designer, developer, administrator, or other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is--
‘(A) the application of systems, network or database analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine or modify hardware, software, network, database, or system functional specifications;
‘(B) the design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, securing, configuration, integration, debugging, modification of computer or information technology, or enabling continuity of systems and applications;
‘(C) directing the work of individuals performing duties described in subparagraph (A) or (B), including training such individuals or leading teams performing such duties; or
‘(D) a combination of duties described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), the performance of which requires the same level of skill;
who is compensated at an hourly rate of not less than $27.63 an hour or who is paid on a salary basis at a salary level as set forth by the Department of Labor in part 541 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations. An employee described in this paragraph shall be considered an employee in a professional capacity pursuant to paragraph (1).’.
Dare to Hope. Prepare to be Disappointed.
As you can see, the hourly rate and the type of worker involved has not changed at all. It appears that they're merely clarifying the definition of a computer services professional.
Personally (and I know this is going to earn me a few "troll" points from our faithful moderators), I am against mandating things like time-and-a-half and double-time pay. Although it sounds like a good deal for hourly workers, in fact it probably discourages employers from paying people more. They'll just get a part timer to come in and do the extra work, or offshore it, or some such.
I'm in IT and when I'm hourly, I love to work 50-60 hours a week. I don't give a damn about all these overtime rules; I just want to make more money. But since around 2001, companies have been much more reluctant to let people bill more than 40 hours a week unless the top management grants special permission to get some project done or some such.
Frankly I wish the government would just stay out of these matters and let the free market decide what's a fair wage, what's fair hours, etc., but maybe I'm naive :)
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
They want to change it to this:
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Guess what? There is nothing more to the story. It's exactly what it sounds like: a money grab.
And if you work in an at-will employment state, you get fired and re-hired with the new terms or walk.
By the way, this isn't about working overtime at your normal rate. It's about working overtime for free.
100% of the bill introducers are democrats.
Kay Hagans office 202.224.6342
Since I'm not from the U.S. I might have misunderstood something here, but does the U.S. senate really have the authority to change in employment contracts for the worse?
Really, no, they don't. Congress is only allowed to regulate inter-state commerce. However, many companies either have presences in multiple states, or at least have clients/customers in multiple states, which would technically make it interstate commerce. The federal government really has no business telling any corporation how much someone should be paid (and this includes minimum wage). I'm not saying minimum wage is bad, I'm simply saying that, in countries as large as the US is, cost of living varies so greatly depending on where you are that in some places you can actually make a living on a minimum wage job(it's not a great one, but still-I've been in areas that in reality probably bring in far less than minimum wage, such as Appalachia), while in other places the minimum wages is grossly inadequate(NYC, LA, Hawaii). Any type of wage level guidelines should be a state issue.
However, as far as I know, national labor laws already say that, at any wage price, anything over 40 hours a week is overtime and must be paid accordingly. And it is already standard that salaried workers do not get overtime. So, the first part makes of this law makes no sense, and the second part is actually discriminatory because it is singling out a wage level as well as a specific industry. I suspect this bill was introduced by Kagan because NC is trying to draw in a lot of tech companies, and the companies lobbied Kagan for this. It would also make sense to have Isakson(who is one of my senators) co-sponsor this because Georgia has been trying to bring in tech companies and push the state as a place for game design and other programming.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
That bill is already law, at least in my country. It is called the Twenty-seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution. Congress can't raise its own pay; it can raise only the next Congress's pay. If you disagree with a pay raise, plead the 27th and vote against the incumbent.
Pity most other countries in the world START at 25 payed days off. That is 5 weeks incase your over worked mind can no longer do math.
Most amazing myth I ever heard about the US is that of the "working poor". People who have a regular job or even two AND still can't keep themselves fed and housed. I am mean, how silly do you think we dutch people are? It is like plate sized hamburgers. Nice photoshop, no way that is real, no human beings could possible eat so much and no dressing up an elephant and putting it on a moped does not fool me.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Breach. Not bridge.
Reid's vote was procedural so that it could be voted on again. You really need to invest time in understanding how our legislative bodies work before letting right-wing idiots (who don't) get you into a frothy dudgeon about them.
One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
But they're not exempt if their pay rate is below a certain threshold, among other conditions. The standards for exempt status in California are more stringent under California law than under federal law, meaning it's more likely that an IT worker qualifies for overtime pay. In California, currently, the hourly pay rate threshold is $37.74 per hour; any work performed over eight hours in a day or forty in a week is eligible for overtime pay. Salaries are calculated as hourly pay, assuming eight hour days and forty hour weeks.
At my workplace, we work 12 hour shifts; this is important. I found out from a co-worker that we were actually entitled to overtime pay; he'd had to explain this to our employer. I discovered our employer was playing dumb, as they claimed not to know anything about this when I brought up the issue, although they conceded the point and paid me my back pay shortly after I was able to cite California labor law, from the same link that That_Dan_Guy posted.
Fortunately, for workers in California, the more stringent standards for exempt status at the state level override the standards at the federal level.
how is this legal? They are specifically targeting IT.... this doesnt seem right.
The first place I ever heard the term "Tea Bagger" was not at a tea party rally. It was from some cable news contributer using the term to marginalize the movement.
But you can believe what ever you need to to feel good about yourself.
nobody voted for him, he was appointed to replace salazar
Bennett was apppointed to replace Ken Salazar in 2009, but he was elected to the office in 2010. About 48% of the nobodies who voted in Colorado that year picked him. One of them is now thinking of unpicking him in 2016.
This might be why:
"The sponsor is Kay Hagan. Listed in her Top 20 contributors are companies like Bank of America, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, and Time Warner. The cosponsors are Michael Bennet (Comcast, Qwest, DISH Network, Level 3, Time Warner), Michael Enzi (Blue Cross/Blue Shield, and John Isakson (Home Depot, Delta, AFLAC, Cox, Citigroup, & GE). So, you know, no one that would be interested in lowering their IT costs a bit. If anyone knows where I could get numbers based on what percentage of employees at those companies are wage versus salary, I'd like to see them."
This is the result of Senate rules. As Senate Majority Leader, Reid has to vote against a bill that is going to fail if he wants to reserve the right to bring it back one day for another vote. He has to constantly vote against bills that he supports.
THIS is the real problem here. "Information Technology" is so broad a term that any professional who uses a computer could wind up being considered an "IT person."
Here's the full text (the importantly vague part is 2(D))
__________________________
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Computer Professionals Update Act’ or the ‘CPU Act’.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF 1938.
Section 13(a)(17) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(a)(17)) is amended to read as follows:
‘(17) any employee working in a computer or information technology occupation (including, but not limited to, work related to computers, information systems, components, networks, software, hardware, databases, security, internet, intranet, or websites) as an analyst, programmer, engineer, designer, developer, administrator, or other similarly skilled worker, whose primary duty is--
‘(A) the application of systems, network or database analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine or modify hardware, software, network, database, or system functional specifications;
‘(B) the design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, securing, configuration, integration, debugging, modification of computer or information technology, or enabling continuity of systems and applications;
‘(C) directing the work of individuals performing duties described in subparagraph (A) or (B), including training such individuals or leading teams performing such duties; or
‘(D) a combination of duties described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), the performance of which requires the same level of skill;
who is compensated at an hourly rate of not less than $27.63 an hour or who is paid on a salary basis at a salary level as set forth by the Department of Labor in part 541 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations. An employee described in this paragraph shall be considered an employee in a professional capacity pursuant to paragraph (1).’.
If they think they can use money to increase profitability, they'll do so. Nothing wrong with it.
Highly disagree. While in the general case, attempting to increase profitability isn't a bad thing, it all comes down to the details. Depending on WHAT they do to try and increase profitability, it can be extremely bad. Shit like this, for instance.
Simply saying that "There's nothing wrong with increasing profitability" as a blanket statement is hugely oversimplifying the situation.
I experienced something similar here in Canada with a previous employer that decided one day to do the same along with not paying for pager duty. The day that it started I gathered my support team together and I explained that we would leave at 4:30 PM sharp regardless of the workload or crisis. The same day, I went to see my director and put the emergency pager on his desk (it was around 3 PM). I told him that if we were not going to be paid we would not answer it and wished him good luck as there were some upgrades scheduled that evening and we expected problems with them. The expression on his face was priceless but he sympathized with me as he did not agree himself with the corporate decision. He offered me time-in-lieu-of, which is basically the equivalent of time off for any overtime/after hours worked. I explained to him that it would have to apply for my whole team and it would be only short term as we worked to earn a salary, not to only to have time off, which of course would complicate work schedules even more. The sad thing is that I found out that my team was the only one to pull that off; everyone else bowed down and shut up right away, bringing morale to an all time low. I can tell you that attendance to that year’s social events (especially the Christmas party) was at an all time low. The only problem I see with this bill is that if anyone pulled off something similar as I did, there is a good chance of a desperado who will come in and do it for even less pay. Now is this the proper way to handle any infrastructure that business relies on? You get what you pay for, and if this bill makes it through it will cause a further decline of the American status which hasn’t looked too hot lately.