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.
And if this idjit is still there, I know I am voting THEM out. What a maroon.
to be kidding me. Let's see if we can get a vote up to lower THEIR pay.
Hurray, no more working late!
Wait.. they still expect people to work without being compensated for their late hours?
Did EA send out lobbyists again with briefcases full of money?
IT work already has a terrible education:pay ratio and the pay is nothing special in relative terms, that's a strange sector to target...could it have something to do with outsourcing?
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
That means I get to go home at six, right?
8 hours work for 8 hours pay.
Don't work for free, people. After all, you're just an employee to them, not a BFF.
I recently saw a guy who had worked at my current place of work get given the shove after nearly 20 years. Escorted him out of the building and everything. He sat in the pub blubbing like a baby and asking how they could be so cruel after everything he'd given them.
I've vowed never to work a minute past what I'm contracted to do, and if I have to I simply come in late the next day.
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
... and their site is down. If only they had some IT guys who could do overtime to bring it back up...
Prk
$27.63 seems oddly specific
But with the amount of overtime pay in the IT community someone will pretty soon realize that unless people actually sometime work overtime to fix problems it won't be long before people start cutting up old tires to make body armour.
- "There is nothing quite like an ineffective solution to an nonexistant problem"
That's like a fantasy for most of us.
If you want a good job vote this man OUT!
I think you mean, "vote this woman OUT".
Sure looks like...
I've read the bill's text but I haven't ascertained any rationale for it. Clearly they think there is some cost savings to be realized, but where? All that will really happen is the skilled workers will get salaries/wages to offset the loss of overtime, leaving the less skilled and fresh grads with the less desirable pay/positions. The net result is less people will want to get into IT due to this new barrier to entry.
...this is still surprising to see this coming from someone with a D after their name. This is not because they are fundamentally more decent, but their usual constituency doesn't really seem to buy the "blame the middle class" argument, at least not as much. This seems like a really, really dumb idea, if for no other reason than the political fallout it will create.
To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
I disagree. Yes if you pick up your smartphone and answer an IT question after hours you most certainly did work overtime. If it is after hours.. work is OVER. and you took TIME to work.
If you think that:
Michael Bennet [D-CO]
Scott Brown [R-MA]
Michael Enzi [R-WY]
John Isakson [R-GA]
Are in the pocket of big labor, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Now, in the broader sense of Nikolay Chernyshevsky's "The worse, the better" theory of what actually drives the poor to organize and/or unionize and/or devour the rich in an orgy of redistributive bloodletting, they may actually be more effective labor leaders than most actual labor leaders; but not in the direct sense...
Aren't most IT workers exempt anyway? (Not that I think they necessarily should be, but still.)
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
How does this make sense for govn't.. isn't this a Private sector issue?
It *is* a private sector issue. You see, people who wanted to pay less for IT guys bribed these senators to pass this bill. The senators rubbed their hands together and agreed. Now they each have a new car.
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
I am going to take a page out of the great depression. the Kellogg cereal company during the great depression lowered the max hours one of their workers could work from 40 to 30 or so. while the people who were working at first did not like the lowering of their income they did like the effects it had on the city around the plant. kellogg to fill the gap hired more workers who in turn only worked the shorter amount of time, but it helped prop up the rest of the city. costs of food and the like there went down and even though the average income went down the people there including the people who had their hours cut ended up liking it. especially the increased time with their family. if they eliminate overtime and the position had scheduled overtime before they should then fill the gap by hiring someone else.
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?
Where I live, the government can enforce things like minimum wages, but if my contract includes overtime pay, then the only way it can disappear is if my employer and I renegotiate the contract.
His theory of capitalism was, in a nutshell, that an employer's goal was to increase profit by increasing the amount they could make their workers work without paying them anything extra. Which is, of course, exactly what is being codified in this law.
Consider some widget that cost $300 to make $250 in materials and $50 for 1 worker to work 6 hours on it. But our capitalist wants to make more money, so he makes his worker work 12 hours instead of 6 (which the worker accepts, because being unemployed is so much worse), so now he has $600 worth of widgets, which are now $500 in materials, $50 in labor, and $50 in profit.
Regardless of what you think about communism, Marx's theories of capitalism need to be taken seriously, because the guy was predicting, in the 1870's, a lot of the economic behavior we see today.
I am officially gone from
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.
I hate how Congress thinks it can legislate anything it wants, and whatever it can't legislate in can hold a "hearing" on and then impose some ridiculous punishment. Interstate commerce. It's not meant to be a gateway for doing whatever the hell you want, it's supposed to be highly restrictive and limiting.
But that is work done beyond your normal 8 hours. Are you saying, that if the boss calls you 24 hours at day at home, he doesn't have to pay you even though your extending your expertise? Fuck that, these supports calls can go on an hour often multiple of times. You basically be working several (often large amount of) hours for free. Why shouldn't they get paid for the thing support they give, which is much like what they do normally at their job. You obviously never worked in most IT environments. Excessive offcalls is extremely common and time consuming (something much more then the job itself).
How is this different than the plight of software engineers, hardware engineers, or designers that work outside of the IT industry? How is it different than the legions of R&D folks that are listed as exempt employees?
I'm not saying it should happen. Far from it. But the real battle is that technical professions all over have been moved to exempt status and their employees continue to be forced to work exceedingly long days for 8 hours of pay. It's not the IT guidelines that need reform, it's the ones for all technical professions.
This is not a sig. this is a duck. quack.
How does this make sense for govn't.. isn't this a Private sector issue?
It's a government issue because the government defines what overtime means in the first place.
If it were purely left up to the private sector, people would still be routinely working 12 hour shifts 7 days per week for base wages, like they did in the 19th century before governments got involved.
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.
IT workers propose bill requiring citizen referendum on any congressional pay raises
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
They want to change it to this:
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Yeah, good luck to them getting anyone one to work on Senator's computers ever again. Email, internet, and computers frequently have problems. Nobody has to crash them... we just don't have to fix them once they do. A day without IT can be a real bitch, just like some Senators.
"Ah, gee, Senator. My shift ended at 5pm and I don't do overtime. Call back tomorrow between 8 and 5pm."
I8-D
It's safely invested in Greek, Italian and Spanish government bonds. They went with a conservative approach to investing.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
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.
Sadly that amendment is not really enforcable. The Supreme Court has basically said there is not a person in the country who would have standing to bring a suit to overturn a pay raise, so if Congress raises it's pay there is nothing that can be done to stop it.
You mean the ammo box is the next box. You gun fetishists had your chance 10 years ago, but you never did anything. Now even with your arsenals you're easily outgunned by the military, police and national guard, who have been trained since then in fighting urban, suburban and rural militias. Lately the police have been out clubbing your fellow citizens, and will only increase the firepower to "mass lethal" when the "problem people" start fighting back.
You didn't use the soap box, the jury box or the ballot box to do anything but keep your fetish objects close. In fact you used all of them to give power to the people who have run the country into the ground.
You're never going to use your guns to fight the government. All your actions have proven otherwise, every time.
--
make install -not war
Well, this is basically the #2 punch in the set. Years back....IT guys could easily be classified at non-exempt, and paid hourly....and get 1.5 time for OT.
The Feds didn't like this...specifically for their contractors...the guys just plain worked too much.
So, IT guys were reclassified as 'professionals' just like doctors, lawyers, managers..etc.
However, still...on contracts...you CAN get straight time for OT hours. There are usually hoops to jump through to get all this approved by the gov. in advance of work...PITA.
I guess they're wanting to close this one off too.
I haven't understood why they do it for private sector and for gov contracting....maybe they have to do it for everyone and can't target just the federal contractors.
It doesn't seem fair, like you said...that they can target one class of worker, but this isn't the first time it has happened.
One thing they may be looking at...as we continue forward, with more and more tech taking over in ALL business....most everything is related to IT in some fashion...and they are maybe trying in broad fashion to use this to cut costs.
Of course, let's target the guys who actually do work...rather than the management.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Your area has more people with guns than the million people in the US military, plus the millions more in the National Guard, the State Police, the state's various municipal, county and local police?
Yes, you are living in a fantasy world. A world from the 1780s, where the locals could have the same firepower and skill as the government forces, instead of little gangs facing satellite guided helicopter, plane and drone bombings and strafings, tank batallions, poison gas... Where the government forces were all from a foreign country, in terrain with no roads, mostly not populated, no databases of political affiliations...
Yes, you are living in a Teabagger fantasy world if you think the many armed Americans have any chance against the actually armed to the teeth military that's been just fine with fighting wars against "guerrillas" for many continuous decades, holding the countries in question under their power even when they're outnumbered there thousands to one by people who want them out.
--
make install -not war
They go in expecting to overreact to a threat - that doesn't actually exist. None of these cops, who have violently arrested, maced without provocation, and beaten hard with clubs now thousands of people were actually threatened. If they felt threatened, it's because they refused to accept the reality happening to them. We have now had many second times, both in the same place and just across the country, for weeks and months.
Have you ever been in a riot? I have. There's a palpable energy generated that's pretty damn scary. I have no idea what it is but it exists. I'll give you that in most of the current situations the police have been the instigators of creating a situation where they had to fear that energy.
It's a no huge step going from macing some trouble making punk kids (mindset of the police, mind you, not my opinion of them) to shooting them in the head.
For anyone but a complete sociopath it is. Killing people (and living with it) isn't easy.
Big enough to find plenty of thugs already in the armed forces ready to kill other Americans, especially ones they see as "spoiled, lazy rich kids".
I think you need to poll the actual grunts on this one. I think you'll find you're way off base here. Yeah, they do exists but they are a small minority and US Army doesn't do anywhere near a good enough job of brainwashing it's recruits to override their moral compasses. The moral ones are more likely to just shoot the idiots. Hell, I got in trouble for telling a Sergeant to fuck off when he tried to get a cruit to empty the garbage in the Sergeant's room. What do you think I'd do if he told me to start shooting civilians? Mind you, I got in trouble for telling him to fuck off not for telling the Sergeant and cruit that he didn't have to and wasn't supposed to do it. Actually I was told I was right about that but was wrong about the way I handled it. In the US military you're told you have an obligation NOT to follow illegal orders. And shooting civilians is WAY over on the illegal order side of things.
And to my original point, it was perfectly clear that this would happen when the gun fetishists spent years voting for Republicans and Democrats who enable them who created this police state in waiting.
At least you're not blaming one political party because the Obama administration has taking Bush's oppressive policies quite a but further towards the wrong end of the scale. But if you think the pro-second amendment people are the primary cause, or even a major one, of the current movement towards a police state you need to broaden your viewpoint. I really don't think it's a big factor at all. The main one is the revolution in communications brought on by the advance of technology. Information is a far more potent weapon against oppression than any number of guns are. The US government is finding that the historical control they've had over information is rapidly eroding and in the process their myriad of sins are more and more coming to light.
Who is John Galt?
No, my complaint is not that "you wackos didn't just start shooting up the place".
It's that you wackos just having the guns was no deterrent, though you claimed it would be.
It's that you wackos claimed that when the government started damaging our rights despite the deterrent, you'd actually start showing more than "I'm the NRA and I vote" bumper stickers. You claimed you'd show up with guns, presumably as reasonable and orderly but opposed to the damage. You never did anything of the sort. Instead, you wackos voted for the people who scared you with "confiscate your guns" boogeyman stories about liberals, then damaged our rights.
And even the few real hardcore wackos you run of the mill wackos implied would actually just start shooting up the place never did. Because you're the kind of wackos who don't care about freedom - you care about having guns, shooting them, and scaring regular people. The authorities are your kind of guys.
I'm not complaining that you wackos never did any of those things because I wanted you wackos to do them. I'm complaining because you cowards were lying about it all. Which flooded the country with guns, which gets more people shot, without the promised deterrent to crimes high and low. And which gives the cops the excuse to treat Americans like our soldiers treat Iraqis and Afghans. All while voting for the people who damaged the freedoms you said you'd protect, if only you had completely wacko access to guns.
This is like when people complain when the "family values" Republicans you voted for, who demagogue against gay people and for the drug war, turn up with a gay whore and a bag of meth. It's not the drugs or the paid gay sex that most of us complain about. It's that they got the power to do that by stopping others from doing it, by lying against being against it. With guns, it's how you lie about being against damaging our rights to get ever more guns, but then never keep your word about using those guns one way or another to protect our rights - you use them and the people giving them to you to damage our rights.
Do you get it? I doubt it. It's not like this is the first time it's been laid out in front of you. That happens every day, and you gun fetish wackos never change.
--
make install -not war