Workers In Brazil Can Claim Overtime For Answering Email After Hours

New submitter zzyvits writes "With smartphones becoming more and more common, the push for employees to work after hours is becoming greater. Would the push be as hard if the employers had to pay for it? A law recently passed in Brazil makes it possible for employees who answer emails after normal work hours to claim overtime pay."

Comments

Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is responsible for being so fair to workers? We'd never get that here (meaning US.)

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[cayenne8]

Actually...it puts more incentive for people to try to opt for the contractor paradigm.

I don't mind working....but I do NOT work for free. If I do work at any time, I bill for it, and yes, it definitely makes the employer think twice about calling or bothering you after hours.

This, and considering that there is such thing as employer loyalty nor job security....hell, just about everyone should opt (if possible) for the contractor route.

If you're gonna get the loyalty and job security from an employer that a contractor gets, you might as well get the freedom, tax breaks and bill rate that a contractor gets....no?

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

In civilised countries, workers get better protections than one-man businesses, and those who set up one-man businesses just for the sake of avoiding tax are treated by the Revenue as workers anyway (UK IR35).

"The contractor paradigm" => the whole company is just interested in enough short term development for executive bonuses => inevitably broken marketplace within a few years. This is why we are where we are now: lack of job security and bonuses sufficiently high to sort people for life meant businesses making decisions which resulted in an unsustainable business model.

But please, feel free to carry on causing the problem. I don't love this degenerate capitalism much anyway.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[russotto]

Who is responsible for being so fair to workers? We'd never get that here (meaning US.)

It's already law in the US, for non-exempt employees. If you're required to respond to emails, the time you spend responding to them count as "hours worked".

29 C.F.R 785.12: "The rule is also applicable to work performed away from the premises or the job site, or even at home. If the employer knows or has reason to believe that the work is being performed, he must count the time as hours worked."
 

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Antarius]

Lucky bastard. I must have had a shit employer.

In the 90s, my employer was responsible for me being hospitalised with a work injury...

I was getting support calls sent to me while in my hospital bed, doped up on pethidine/demerol. (and yeah, they (illegally) took it out of my leave - I had to fight to get it credited back!)

No surprise I left them later that year. >.>

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[aaarrrgggh]

Gaming the system is stupid-- claiming contractor status when you only work for one company. But, if your position has ups and downs based on project cycles, becoming an independent contractor and working with different companies can be a good move... unless you are doing it through an agency and not as your own business.

For people with an entrepreneurial spirit... who like to work hard, starting your own business is a great thing to do. Complaining about answering an email after hours is silly except in extreme situations. One of those might be when I was telecommuting from halfway around the globe and had to be able to respond near real-time while sleeping. I chose the location though, so it is hard to complain.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[hedwards]

Actually in the US under the FLSA employers have to pay for all the time that employees spend working, regardless of when that happens. There are a few things which are excluded from that list, but answering email and phones is definitely something they're required to pay for. The problem though is that getting it enforced is quite cumbersome and employers are used to getting that work for free.

At the end of the day if they need people working outside of business hours they need to be going through the proper steps to ensure that the employees are exempted from those requirements.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

That's why I quit my previous employer. The HR bitch at ABM was threatening to fire me if I didn't work off the clock and pay checks were usually quite late.

Posted AC for a reason.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Karljohan]

It's probably unconstitutional and won't hold in court ;-)

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[morcego]

So companies cannot monitor employees e-mail usage. That is unfair and violate their privacy.
Companies cannot stop employees from using the company e-mail for personal things. That would be unfair.
But if the employees use e-mail after hours, it is considered overtime.

It is also interesting that, in Brazil, you have to pay the employee for overtime even if it was UNAUTHORIZED. Even if the company has a policy in place that authorization is needed. Since (according mostly to unions), authorized or not, the company benefited from it.

As a small business owners myself, I can attest how difficult it is to hire people here. The government and unions make it such a pain that even my employees hate them.

Brazil and US are, in some aspects, at the opposite ends of the labor law spectrum. And trust me, I don't think one end if much better than the other.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Lumpy]

"that's why I quit my previous employer. The HR bitch at ABM was threatening to fire me if I didn't work off the clock and pay checks were usually quite late."

You fill out time cards anyways and turn them in with the overtime. make copies and send them and your pay stubs to the state.

HR bitch ends up fired, Company is fined a very significant amount of money and is forced to pay all back wages to all employees with interest.

If you keep your mouth quiet and act like a good slave they get away with this crap.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Not likely, that company has serious corruption issues and they don't provide copies for the employees. All logs are on the same sheet making it difficult to get a copy.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[morcego]

If you're required to respond to emails, the time you spend responding to them count as "hours worked".

And the key word here is "required".

Yes, if you are REQUIRED to do it, then yes, it should count as overtime.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[duguk]

Not likely, that company has serious corruption issues and they don't provide copies for the employees. All logs are on the same sheet making it difficult to get a copy.

Never thought I'd see on Slashdot someone complaining that it's difficult to get a copy of something...

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it's easy for an employer to prove they did not "require" their employees to do it.

Wasn't there a case with Walmart where employees were voluntarily attending training classes during lunch, without pay. Walmart lost the case and had to pay for those voluntary hours.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[sjames]

Complaining about having to answer AN email after hours might be silly, but if it becomes a regular part of your duties then you are effectively never off work. Enjoy answering AN email while your family is watching a movie, while your kid is in the school play, when everyone else is playing a game on the weekend, etc etc.

Why not take it to the logical next step. Perhaps you could take 2 or 3 hours worth of homework with you each night.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[sjames]

Just watch out for cases where it's constructively required. Cases where it's entirely 'optional' except that you go to the top of the layoff list if you don't.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[AngryDeuce]

No surprise I left them later that year. >.>

Frankly, I would have tendered my resignation in that hospital bed. No employer that callous and demeaning is worth working for. Some things are more important than money. Self respect, for one.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[russotto]

Just watch out for cases where it's constructively required. Cases where it's entirely 'optional' except that you go to the top of the layoff list if you don't.

Doesn't matter; in the US even if the work is 'optional' you have to be paid for it if you're non-exempt, if the employer knew or had reason to believe you were doing it.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[sjames]

Exactly, and mostly for the reason I pointed out. But that wasn't Morcego's proposal.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[lvxferre]

It's trivial to reach a compromise: make crystal clear what's employee's personal things and what is job-related things, and apply this to e-mail accounts. Allow companies to check employee's job-related mail, but not the personal one. Ta-da! Problem solved.

About your 2nd paragraph: labour unions are just making their job, to defend the worker's interests. It's not their fault, but legal - Brazil's Legislative power isn't known for effective law-making...

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Being a contractor in the US is impossible if you have any chronic illnesses (even if they do nothing to prevent you from working, just give a substantial risk of cancer for example). This is thanks to awesome privatized medicine that tells you to fuck off if you try to get health insurance.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[cayenne8]

Who's 'gaming' the system?

I've always worked strictly within the rules and limits....I mean, if there is a tax break or advantage that is legal, is it not foolish to take full advantage of it ? I mean, it is YOUR money after all.

That being said....why not have everyone take more responsibility for their own job, pay, medical and needs. A lot of the problems today is because of so many others involved in the process, every one with a hand out...driving up prices for everything.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Many of us do...

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Lorens]

No surprise I left them later that year.

Frankly, I would have tendered my resignation in that hospital bed.

Bad move. Definitely wait until you get out of the hospital before resigning!

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[russotto]

So companies cannot monitor employees e-mail usage. That is unfair and violate their privacy.

In the US, companies can monitor employee e-mail usage. I don't know about Brazil.

Companies cannot stop employees from using the company e-mail for personal things. That would be unfair.

Companies in the US can prohibit employees from using the company email for personal things. Whether they can stop it is a different matter.

It is also interesting that, in Brazil, you have to pay the employee for overtime even if it was UNAUTHORIZED. Even if the company has a policy in place that authorization is needed. Since (according mostly to unions), authorized or not, the company benefited from it.

This is also true in the US; it's to avoid the obvious dodge of having overtime explicitly unauthorized but implicitly required. The employer must enforce any policy against overtime.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[morcego]

labour unions are just making their job, to defend the worker's interests

You can't be that naive. I refuse to believe that.

Labour union, in Brazil or anywhere in the world, are more interested in politics than worker's interests these days. They make decisions based on what will gain votes for their politician of choice, who in return will get public offices for key people from the unions, or benefit the union in some other way.

make crystal clear what's employee's personal things and what is job-related things, and apply this to e-mail accounts. Allow companies to check employee's job-related mail, but not the personal one.

Any role that can't be monitored can't be enforced. I invite you to try.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[morcego]

So companies cannot monitor employees e-mail usage. That is unfair and violate their privacy.

In the US, companies can monitor employee e-mail usage. I don't know about Brazil.

In theory, not only company can do it in Brazil, but they are obligated by law to do so. The law states that "any crime or offense committed using companies resources make the company in question automatically co-responsible" (that is not the exact wording, and it is a rough translation). It was already tested in court in one case, and the company won, so there is jurisprudence. However, this kind of issue is so expensive for the company that, unless they have very deep pocket and big interest in this kind of fight, it is virtually impossible for them to do so.

Although criminal and civil lawsuits are nowhere as expensive in Brazil as they are in the US, labor lawsuits are EXTREMELY expensive, once the law inverts the burden of proof: for all practical effects, it is the company that has to prove it is not guilty.

Companies cannot stop employees from using the company e-mail for personal things. That would be unfair.

Companies in the US can prohibit employees from using the company email for personal things. Whether they can stop it is a different matter.

The difference between prohibiting something, and stopping it from happening is a big one.

It is also interesting that, in Brazil, you have to pay the employee for overtime even if it was UNAUTHORIZED. Even if the company has a policy in place that authorization is needed. Since (according mostly to unions), authorized or not, the company benefited from it.

This is also true in the US; it's to avoid the obvious dodge of having overtime explicitly unauthorized but implicitly required. The employer must enforce any policy against overtime.

Yup. And enforcing it is the big problem. It is very easy for the company to be sued for wrongful dismissal (or whatever it is called in the US) if they fire someone because of this. Even if the company wins, the cost of this kind of lawsuit is extraordinarily expensive.

Overall, the feeling among micro, small and medium business owners in Brazil is: finding ways to hire less. The costs are just too high. Even if you consider the minimum costs, it averages to an extra 102%. So lets say we have an employee who has a salary of $1000/month. No benefits. That employee will cost the company an average of $2020/month. Or you could say the employee is only receiving has the money. On top of that you have to add mandatory benefits (how can it be a benefit if it is mandatory?!?!?!), legal costs, HR costs etc etc, and each employee can easily cost 3x what he actually makes. I would know, since I was an employee for 10+ years, then a contractor, then a business owner.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I really don't mind answering job emails during my free time. After all, I also answer private mails during worktime. I think fairness is a two-way street.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Zebai]

i was about to say this same thing. I am able to claim any time i spending answering emails if responding off hours is required. Currently I have no such requirement I am allowed to ignore any messages while off hours until i return to work as a result if i choose to do so i cannot claim that time.

There are some employees that monitor at all hours of the day (my supervisor being one) however they are all exempt, they are not hourly employees like i am and that time is part of their contract salary.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[SwedishPenguin]

Do you think unions are going into politics just for the sake of it? Of course not, they're in it to defend workers interests. Think of all the laws that have been passed largely due to union involvement in politics (at least in Europe) - 8 hour work day, minimum paid vacation time (usually 4-6 weeks depending on the country), paid parental leave, regulations against at-will dismissal, pensions, etc. Unions can't do everything by simply negotiating with employers, especially not if there are no protections of involvement in unions by law. You may not consider these good things, but I certainly do and I can assure you that 90% of workers do.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a simple solution when work refuses to stay at work. Stop answering your phone/email, or only answer it for about 6 months after your last raise and then go back to ignoring it until the next raise.

Myself I just turn the damn thing off.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[ryanov]

Going further than that, workers in Wisconsin and New Jersey have figured out that you can negotiate anything you want at the bargaining table but if your state passes a law taking that thing away, you're hosed. Politics govern so much of any person's life, one really can't avoid involvement.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Registered Coward v2]

If you're gonna get the loyalty and job security from an employer that a contractor gets, you might as well get the freedom, tax breaks and bill rate that a contractor gets....no?

One thing to remember - an employee's wages go to the head of the line in a bankruptcy; a contractor gets in line with the rest of the creditors and is subject to all the various bankruptcy rulings.

Contract work is great, but you aren't simply exchanging one check for another that has the same protections as a paycheck.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[Anonymous Coward]

In the US, you also have to pay the employee for unauthorized overtime, if you let them work it. Partly this is a measure to prevent employers from getting work for free by saying it wasn't authorized; in practice, if it truly wasn't authorized, they can just fire the disobedient employee.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[antdude]

Contractor sucks though due to lack of fringe benefits like stocks, 401K, medical insurances, etc. Also, most salary jobs don't get OT. :(

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[tompaulco]

Contractor sucks though due to lack of fringe benefits like stocks, 401K, medical insurances, etc.
Yes, but most employment positions also suck due to lack of fringe benefits like stocks, 401K, medical insurances, etc.
Most fringe benefits that a company tries to sell you on are not really that beneficial. About the only one that is worthwhile is the 401k, if they match. Almost no companies are giving stocks any more. If they offer you medical, it is something you still have to pay for so I don't see why they get to claim it as a benefit. At my company, I don't use their medical insurance, because even after paying in after tax dollars it was cheaper for me to get my own individual plan.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[antdude]

Which company is that so we can avoid it? ;) Here's mine: http://symantecbenefits.com/ FYI.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[tompaulco]

Yes, if you are REQUIRED to do it, then yes, it should count as overtime.
I think my employer takes the position that you are not required to answer 99% of the e-mails that you get on nights and weekends, but the other 1% you are required to answer, and in order to know what that 1% is, you have to at least READ them all.
Of course, it is probably also my employers position that I am exempt, although 90% of people who are classified as exempt are not exempt.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[tompaulco]

It is also interesting that, in Brazil, you have to pay the employee for overtime even if it was UNAUTHORIZED.
Well, clearly someone sent them an e-mail asking a question. That sounds like authorization. If they didn't want the employee to answer the question, they should not have sent it during off hours.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[cayenne8]

Where do you get that?

I set up my own "S" corp....I set up my own retirement vehicles, medical insurance is no big deal, I got a high deductible insurance policy ($1200) for emergency care (heart attack or the like)..and socked away $3K a year (more now I think) for my own HSA (Health Savings Account) pre-tax....which is not a use it or lose it fund like FSA's.....this is for routine medical visits, etc. Also, when I told my Dr's that I was paying on my own, they gave me a 15% discount on procedures and office visits...

And when contracting...you get paid for EVERY hour you work, which is my main point.

Even when I do W2 salary...I negotiate up front that I get a least straight time paid for anything over 40 hours a week. It is a matter of negotiations.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[antdude]

My current employer and CA's laws. Even my dotcom employer didn't give me OT pay. Both were SQA jobs. :(

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[tompaulco]

Which company is that so we can avoid it?
So far, every company I have worked for has been that way. I looked at Symantec's family coverage, and that is pretty awesome. My company pays for a me as an individual, but if I put my family in, it would be about $900 a month. It looks like Symantec's would be about $300 a month. At the moment, I am taking the free option from my company, and paying about $240 a month for an individual plan, so I would still come out ahead of Symantec's family plan.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[antdude]

Cool. For me, I am just a single old old fart. ;)

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[cayenne8]

My current employer and CA's laws. Even my dotcom employer didn't give me OT pay. Both were SQA jobs. :(

CA == California??

Did you discuss this when negotiating your terms of employment? Did you push for OT to be included when negotiating for you job?

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[antdude]

Yep, California. CA's laws only does it for lower titles.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[lsatenstein]

As I understand it, Brazil and most of Latin America have some serious economic problems that work to make unemployment a small percentage. There must be a target of 50% domestic value added for any product brought into the country, or that product experiences duties to make it include 50% local value. Exception -- no such recognized industry in that country for an imported product.

So, how does that relate to the overtime topic. Because Latin Americans tend to be abused by foreign owned corporations, and therefore, this is a way to give due compensation as foreign companies tend to not respect reasonable domestic work hours.
At one time I was putting in 60 hours per week to bring in a software before the new year, and my boss was blind to it, until I wrote code into the software that called cell, or pager with a text message immediately when the bug (during the 2am overnight processing occurred).
I soon got appreciated.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[aaarrrgggh]

I've always worked strictly within the rules and limits....I mean, if there is a tax break or advantage that is legal, is it not foolish to take full advantage of it ? I mean, it is YOUR money after all.

From the IRS perspective, people cheat on their social security/self-employment tax by effectively claiming that their earned income is dramatically lower then their gross pay. Enforcement is harder across many small entities.

That being said....why not have everyone take more responsibility for their own job, pay, medical and needs.

...because at least 50% of the population is incapable of taking appropriate responsibility for their actions and future.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[pnutjam]

The funny thing is you think 15% is a good discount. When I get statements from my insurance everything is discount at least 15%, usually more like 30% to 50%, sometimes I see 90%. I always pay the same copay.

Re:Spontaneous outbreak of common sense

[cayenne8]

But in the long run..with HSA and all...I come out ahead because I have that money building, rolling over and over annually pre-tax...and could even invest it if I wanted (when market gets a little more stable).

The thing is...if EVERYONE went back to more of the model where you as the consumer, shopped around for doctors (best, cheapest, etc)...and only used insurance for emergencies (it used to be called major medical for a reason), the prices would come back down due to more competition.

Not that long ago back....before HMO's and all the bean counters became the middlemen in medicine, it wasn't all that expensive.

Why should a person save for routine medical needs...just like he saves part of his paycheck for mortgage/rent, food, gas....etc.?

on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

People also use their smartphone more during work hours for all things but work.

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

Bollocks. Some people may, mainly managers.

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. Managers are usually actually working. It's the peons who use the fuck out of their smartphones, as well as the company's bandwidth streaming music and video, and generally not working.

Re:on the other hand

[dougisfunny]

Then that would imply the managers aren't working, since the manager's job is to make sure the peons are working.

Re:on the other hand

[Rockoon]

It's the peons who use the fuck out of their smartphones, as well as the company's bandwidth streaming music and video, and generally not working.

If this was a real problem then they would be fired after making those things verboten. The employer is paying a rate derived from the amount of work actually done in practice by the typical employee, not the theoretical maximum amount of work a typical employee could perform.

Employees that recognize that they do more work than is typical should ask for a raise and if they do not get it should then respond in a rational manner by either reducing output or looking for a new job.

Re:on the other hand

[jaymz666]

streaming music does not imply not working. It's often easier to concentrate on work when you have music to drown out the hum of annoying coworkers around you in the cube farm

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you think managers are glorified hall monitors, it's obvious which class you fall into.

Swing, and a miss!

Re:on the other hand

[TheRaven64]

No, the manager's job is to make sure that the company's objective's are achieved on time and in budget. If an employee's overall productivity is higher if he or she takes periodic breaks to play Angry Birds or post on Slashdot rather than working solidly all of the time in the office, then only a bad manager would insist on removing the 'distractions'. Most people work best if they take short breaks quite frequently.

I'm pretty sure that you are replying to a troll though. The 'company's bandwidth streaming music' bit was a bit of a giveaway - streaming Internet radio uses very little bandwidth and lots of people work better with music in the background.

Re:on the other hand

[Hognoxious]

It's often easier to concentrate on work when you have music to drown out the hum of annoying coworkers around you in the cube farm

And then I put some music on to drown out the annoying hum of your music. Where will it end?

Re:on the other hand

[russotto]

And then I put some music on to drown out the annoying hum of your music. Where will it end?

When everyone gets some decent headphones (not crappy earbuds) which don't subject those nearby to the music being listened to. This is one problem which really does have a technical solution.

Re:on the other hand

[jd2112]

I'm pretty sure that you are replying to a troll though. The 'company's bandwidth streaming music' bit was a bit of a giveaway - streaming Internet radio uses very little bandwidth and lots of people work better with music in the background.

A single user streaming internet music is neglibile. A hundred can saturate your network connections to the point that the apps the employees should be running are no longer functional.

Re:on the other hand

[aurizon]

Well, pay them for after hours work and deduct from then the personal e-mail answered during work hours. The employee can simply advise work they do not answer after hours emails or phone calls. If they are salaried, then the problem goes away because the concept of salaried removes the hours counting in the day and at night.

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

"Lisa, if you don't like your job you don't strike. You just go in every day and do it really half-assed. That's the American way." -Homer

Re:on the other hand

[tqk]

It's often easier to concentrate on work when you have music to drown out the hum of annoying coworkers around you in the cube farm

And then I put some music on to drown out the annoying hum of your music. Where will it end?

I think fondly back to the day that I received an irate email from a supervisor. We'd been working all morning, conversing over email, then he decided to walk around to my office for a chat, and I wasn't there! I'd been logged in via ssh all morning, still in my jammies, and it peed him off no end that he hadn't realized that was possible without him noticing.

Funneeee! :-)

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually Managers are the special ed class, they have manager jobs because if they were in a position where they did real work they would cause damage to the company with their incompetence.

Re:on the other hand

[Lumpy]

Competent IT will put in Stream reflectors for the users.

We put that in place for the 10 top played internet radio streams in the company, the $200.00 linux servers connects, and then rebroadcasts the stream to up to 500 users.

So I have 500 people listening with the bandwidth overhead of 10.

Re:on the other hand

[jaymz666]

A good pair of headphones will not leak enough sound to be heard above the din of the air circulation system, pc fans and other assorted noises in an office environment.

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

When everyone gets some decent headphones (not crappy earbuds) which don't subject those nearby to the music being listened to. This is one problem which really does have a technical solution.

I'm as much a fan of decent headphones as anybody but you can't put decent headphones in your pocket when you leave for the day. They just aren't as convenient.

Besides, earbuds, even crappy ones, are sealed to the ear canal and consequently very quiet to anyone else. I work in a cube farm filled with people using earbuds and I've never heard any noise from them, even when walking up and tapping people on the shoulder to get their attention.

Re:on the other hand

[jd2112]

Competent IT will put in Stream reflectors for the users.

We put that in place for the 10 top played internet radio streams in the company, the $200.00 linux servers connects, and then rebroadcasts the stream to up to 500 users.

So I have 500 people listening with the bandwidth overhead of 10.

But when the competent IT staff proposes this management says 'Why don't we just block the streaming sites on the firewall for free?"

Re:on the other hand

[russotto]

Besides, earbuds, even crappy ones, are sealed to the ear canal and consequently very quiet to anyone else.

No, they aren't. A tinny version of the music comes out the back of the earbud and is quite audible to anyone nearby in a quiet room. This may or may not be true with decent earbuds, it is most certainly true with crappy ones.

Re:on the other hand

[JonySuede]

You do a google science search, find an article that support your point and say something like this : According to that emeritus researcher in HR, removing access to music during work reduce worker productivity by n%. Therefore the cost of blocking music is 500*p$(employee)*n% per year while the cost of efficiently stream it is a one time cost of 200$ + 40$/Hr*10Hr plus a maintenance cost of 1Hr*40$/Hr per year, what do you choose.

Re:on the other hand

[tomhudson]

Or give people offices with doors.

Then they don't have the distractions of everyone else on their phones, everyone else's noise, they probably have enough space to actually put things, instead of the pitiful amount allotted to most cubby-dwellers (32 square feet of flat surfaces is the minimum - desk, table, shelving).

Re:on the other hand

[Mista2]

This is one of the few things from RIM I wish was on iOS, time profiles for checking into mail systems, and alerts.
I'd love for silent alarms from 11:00pm to 7:00am as if I forget to mote the phone and iPad, and computer, I hear the chime from my PC in my office (if it's really quiet at home) then my phone and iPad chime in too, charging beside the bed. If its on a list my wife also belongs to, her phone will ping too. 8) a couple of times of this happening at 2:am and I really think I should charge for it.

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

Ain't that the fucking truth...

You trace any internal problem to it's source, you invariably find some idiot middle manager that fucked around with something he shouldn't have been touching on the vague orders of some out-of-touch C-level. The worst part is, when the shit hits the fan and heads start rolling, it's always the peons that are the first to get the axe, while the idiot middle manager just gets transferred around to some other department.

Re:on the other hand

[webnut77]

Interesting. I've never heard of this. Can you point me in the right direction with a URL?

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

It depends on both the type and make of the earbuds. In my experience, the in-ear buds deliver significantly better audio and at sensible volumes do not leak noise to others. They also have the advantage of not having to put them back into your ear every few minutes, as is the case with the old-style crappy ones. They also do not take nearly the amount of space as the real headphones with the cushions. Frankly I don't get how anyone can live without them.

Re:on the other hand

[Lumpy]

http://www.icecast.org/

It's been around forever, start reading the server docs.

Re:on the other hand

[jd2112]

You do a google science search, find an article that support your point and say something like this : According to that emeritus researcher in HR, removing access to music during work reduce worker productivity by n%. Therefore the cost of blocking music is 500*p$(employee)*n% per year while the cost of efficiently stream it is a one time cost of 200$ + 40$/Hr*10Hr plus a maintenance cost of 1Hr*40$/Hr per year, what do you choose.

(PHB) we're not paying our workers to listen to music. Block all the music sites. And this "google.com" site as well. You seem to be spending a lot of time there instead of working.

Re:on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

Now where is the "Funny but True" moderation option?

Re:on the other hand

[evilviper]

It's not true with decent earbuds, in fact. Senheiser even has "noise isolating" earbuds.

Plenty of middle of the road traditional headphones have more of a sound leakage problem than any earbuds.

Re:on the other hand

[shiftless]

Besides, earbuds, even crappy ones, are sealed to the ear canal and consequently very quiet to anyone else.

In my experience, you can hear earbuds MUCH more easily than a real pair of headphones, especially if the inconsiderate fool has them turned up too loud. And if there is any one thing that would just about make me want to throw somebody through a fucking window, it's having to listen to someone else's music through earbuds that are turned up too loud.

Re:on the other hand

[jaymz666]

Why not leave the headphones at the office? Pull out the earbuds for your commute or whatever?

Re:on the other hand

[adolf]

Depends on the construction of the headphones, not the size of them.

Headphones/earbuds/earspeakers/whatever come in four different basic forms:

1. Those that are sealed to the ear and against the environment (such as those that are used by performers for in-ear monitoring )

2. Those that are sealed against the ear and open to the environment.

3. Those that are sealed against the environment and open against the ear.

4. Those that are sealed against nothing.

And, well, that's it.

The more sealed-up they are, the less others can hear them.

*shrug*

My current favorite pair is a set of middle-of-the-road Sony in-ear jobbies that are reasonably isolated. It's nigh-impossible for others to hear them while I've got them in my head, at even insane ear-ringing levels.

Re:on the other hand

[JonySuede]

Wow, I am impressed !!! Your, hopefully hypothetical, PHB is HP CEO material !

Re:on the other hand

[webnut77]

Hey, thanks man.

What do you for the source for icecast? How to you relay internet radio streams?

Re:on the other hand

[tompaulco]

Not in my company. The workers work. The managers play with their gadgets. I'm a manager, too, well more of a team leader, but I don't have gadgets other than a smartphone, and I don't use it for surfing at all. Since my workplace has these things called computers, I don't need to surf on my smartphone. And I wouldn't play games on it either. The UI of a smartphone doesn't lend itself to playing games efficiently.

Everyone already can do this

[wisnoskij]

If you work after hours (no matter what you are specifically doing) and you are employed on a hourly basis then of course you can claim overtime.
You do not need a specific law for this.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[drinkypoo]

But how much can you claim? if your employer calls you in they have to pay you for at least two hours... well, where I live, I don't know how widespread that is. If I have to think about work for half an hour I will keep thinking about it after that time, and it will impinge upon me. But I probably still only get to claim half an hour, right?

Re:Everyone already can do this

[TrekkieGod]

If you work after hours (no matter what you are specifically doing) and you are employed on a hourly basis then of course you can claim overtime. You do not need a specific law for this.

In Brazil, salaried workers get paid overtime if they work over 44 hours a week or more than 8 hours in a single day. So, if you worked a normal 40 hour week, but had to pull 10 hours on a tuesday, you get paid your salary plus 2 hours overtime.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[sunderland56]

1. Team up with a co-worker.
2. Exchange a long string of emails back and forth each evening.
3. Profit!

Re:Everyone already can do this

[Gideon Wells]

That is how it is where I work. I actually felt bad that I just threw on half an hour of out of work time (I even wanted it straight since I was on vacation) because one morning one group woke me up, and when I was done with them I had two other groups pestering me immediately for information questions. So I charged that half-hour out of spite/principal. Some of it through emails.

Work gave me two hours because technically it was a call-in.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[Forty Two Tenfold]

If you work after hours (no matter what you are specifically doing) and you are employed on a hourly basis then of course you can claim overtime. You do not need a specific law for this.

In Brazil, salaried workers get paid overtime if they work over 44 hours a week or more than 8 hours in a single day. So, if you worked a normal 40 hour week, but had to pull 10 hours on a tuesday, you get paid your salary plus 2 hours overtime.

Communists!~

Re:Everyone already can do this

[Stormthirst]

Communists!~

No. Just sane people

Re:Everyone already can do this

[Stormthirst]

At which point HR will look rather closely at your "work related activity" out of hours. At the very least they will just not pay you that over time, and every single hour that you claim after that will be scrutinized. Or they will just fire you for fraud. You might get away with a few hours every month, but "each evening" will earn you the pink slip you deserve.

The system relies on people being honest.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[wisnoskij]

"If I have to think about work for half an hour I will keep thinking about it after that time, and it will impinge upon me."

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.
If your job involves complex problem solving (you get paid to think) then obviously you can change them for overtime contemplation.
If you are saying every time you are reminded of work you spend hours uncontrollability and un-constructively thinking about it, like a tune stuck in your head. then of course you cannot.

Let me restate: if you are employed on an hourly basis and are doing any kind of work outside of work you can get overtime in whatever country you live.
If your state has some specific minimum number of hours for at home work then you get that.
It does not matter if they phone you, email you, or just shout very loudly in your general direction.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[wisnoskij]

Same as Canada, nut normally at least (not sure about the law). you need a full time week to get any overtime during the week (weekend is always overtime).

Re:Everyone already can do this

[wisnoskij]

Same as Canada, but normally at least (not sure about the law) you need a full time week to get any overtime during the week (weekend is always overtime).

Re:Everyone already can do this

[Anonymous Coward]

HR does _not_ "rely on people being honest." It makes arbitrary and capricious judgements based on management biases and current mood.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[Lumpy]

"But how much can you claim? if your employer calls you in they have to pay you for at least two hours... "

I leave work and drive home. if I get a phone call or email I must respond to I coult all the time from when I left work into that call.

Call to ask me a question at 10pm? I just got 5 hours of overtime for that call. IT significantly limits the quantity of dumb calls that can easily be answered the next work day at the office.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[tqk]

The system relies on people being honest.

You're what's wrong with 21st Century management. You immediately leap on the dishonest button when confronted with something new, instead of looking at it as potentially a smart innovation that would be good for all concerned.

I've worked lots of places where there was no time during the day to train subordinates and not enough time to get everything done. When half my working day's taken up attending meetings and other such BS, when do we actually get any work done?

I'd consider it a pleasure to be online after hours with my PFNG teaching them what they need to know should I get kissed by a bus some morning. I've sent many a 0300h email describing to superiors what I'd been doing all evening coming up with a fix for their latest raging forest fire.

Yet you see us all as obviously out to game the system. News: we're desperately trying to find a way to work around your hideously unworkable accepted procedures.

In other News: 21st Century management is labour hostile.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, serious jobs (you know, >100k/year) in Canada do not get overtime. You work for a salary, you do whatever it takes to get it done, you get said salary. If you don't like it, become a consultant.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[tomhudson]

That's too simplistic an answer. If you normally work a 40-hour week, and you are not an owner or director of the business, you are an ordinary employee and can most certainly demand that any extra time worked be paid.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[kullnd]

That would really suck for people who like working 4 10 hour shifts to get their 3 day weekends... Some business models work better with this type of schedule, and many people enjoy working that type of schedule... Forcing employers to pay overtime in this case would not be good, IMO ... Of course, I would just cut pay to cover the extra expense now built into my peoples checks as part of normal scheduling. (asshole, no, ... but 8 hours of overtime per employee is a business expense that would seriously hurt many small businesses.)

Work 40 hours in one week at normal pay, and get time and a half for everything after 40 hours in the week... sounds plenty fair to me.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[lvxferre]

I don't really know if management supposes the people are honest or dishonest, but this is the Moral way. Isn't simpler just do the Science way? Check the things, asks politely for work done, efficiency, things like that.

Re:Everyone already can do this

[TrekkieGod]

That would really suck for people who like working 4 10 hour shifts to get their 3 day weekends...

I don't see any reason why you couldn't work it out with your employer to get a salary pay cut such that your salary + "overtime" in such a system would equal your original salary.

They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

They're not going to pay overtime. So what they'll do is instruct the email servers to not send mail outside office hours. This might cause problems if employees don't all work at the same time. But doubtless the servers can be programmed to send mail in some customized fashion.

Maybe even make it the employee's job to update a settings page in the web terminal for the email system.

Memo 5441: Employees are required to keep current their hours by logging into the provided address. Errors in this system will be assumed the employee's responsibility and the company takes no responsibility for... yahtah yahtah yahtah.

They're not paying over time. Governments might be dumb enough to do it but corps just won't. So they'll find some way to not do it. They don't really need employees to respond to company emails outside of work time anyway.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Hentes]

Not paying overtime by not requiring overtime work is exactly the purpose of this legislation I believe. What is wrong with that?

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

Not paying overtime by not requiring overtime work is exactly the purpose of this legislation I believe. What is wrong with that?

You mean besides the fact that its a coercion of freedom?

Maybe I want to market myself as available for some minor duties (such as responding to urgent emails) after hours, as needed, for a higher base wage? Well now if I lived in Brazil I cannot do that.

Furthermore, wont the effect be to exert a downward pressure on the base pays of those this law happens to target?

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Anonymous Coward]

You could just charge overtime then.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe if you want to market yourself as available 24/7 for the rest of your life after a one time fee?

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I want to market myself as somebody who isn't worried about inhaling toxic gasses. Worker safety laws are a coercion of freedom.

If workers don't want to inhale toxic gasses, then they won't take those jobs. Just like how that happened before worker safety laws.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

Maybe I feel the after-hours access to me is worth more than my base rate multiplied by some time and scale factor. This is dictating the manner of that compensation, thereby reducing both my freedom and my employers.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Hentes]

Brazil is a leftist country, which means they take workers' rights seriously. You see, as there is a competition in a labour market, without regulations like minimal wage or overtime pay the companies could just require workers to work more for less pay, because there would always be someone else to take the job. By regulating overtime, the state ends the competition between the workers, thus solving the prisoners dilemma scenario and resulting in an environment that's better for everyone.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

Worker safety laws are a coercion of freedom.

They certainly are, but society has decided that it has a moral authority to enact some worker safety laws because members of the society are sometimes incapable of assessing risk in various working scenarios

Now, explain what worker safety laws have to do with wage legislation. What moral authority does society have in determining the manner of my compensation?

Maybe I want a per-email payment. Piece Work isnt immoral, is it? Brazil just outlawed considering the after-hours fielding of email as piece work, demanding that it be considered only "overtime."

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Kjella]

Yeah, a lot of those worker protection laws are restrictions on your freedom to work in unsanitary, dangerous conditions and on exploitative or slave contracts. And apart from a few libertarian freaks most think it's a good thing.

Any time you get a specified amount of money for an unspecified amount of work you're going to get screwed, because the natural reaction in every company is to abuse that privilege as much as possible. Paying you a fixed salary with no overtime is like the company giving a fixed price bid wth a line item saying "Any changes the client wants". The company would be insane to do that and honestly, so it seems are most US workers. Yes, obviously paying overtime pay means base salary goes down so the total remains about the same. But for one it's much fairer among the workers, those that actually work overtime get paid and those who don't doesn't and secondly it takes away the incentive to abuse you by constantly sending "urgent" mails to squeeze free work out of you. If you work, you get paid. The only people that seem to have a problem with that principle is managers.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Mr. Underbridge]

What did you want, some law that lets employees print money by answering a few emails, without the company's ability to control that cost at all? Come on.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

You see, as there is a competition in a labour market, without regulations like minimal wage or overtime pay the companies could just require workers to work more for less pay, because there would always be someone else to take the job.

Countries like Hong Kong seem to do OK with very few regulations, because their over-supply of workers induced more businesses to start up inevitably reducing that over-supply of workers. America was the same as they used to let anyone in the world come here, and by the millions per year they did. By the end of that period America had the most diverse and powerful economy on the planet.

Minimum wage is the most regressive employment regulation imaginable.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[aintnostranger]

No, you are free to ask for more. What this legislation establishes is the minimum. Nobody is banning higher overtime pay.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[j35ter]

Sir, you have some brown stuff around your lips....

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Jessified]

How is dictating that employees who do work must be paid for said work reducing freedom? Is it reducing freedom to outlaw theft, too?

Generally speaking, it's possible to contract around laws. In Canada, a collective agreement has the first priority, and then any areas not covered by the CA fall to the employment legislation.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

No, you are free to ask for more.

But not free to negotiate how.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Stormthirst]

VW already do this with their Blackberry servers, although the state aim was to encourage a better work life balance. I realise this concept is strange to a lot of Americans - but there are companies out there that do this.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Stormthirst]

It won't push down the wages of the people this law targets - because I bet you at the moment they aren't being paid for the work at all. Now the companies have a choice - they can either cut off their servers from sending emails out of hours OR they can pay their employees for working out of house.

In the case of the former, the employee will get paid the same and have more time to enjoy themselves

In the case of the latter, the employee will get paid more because it will be over time.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Stormthirst]

That's what half of American does already. The difference is, they don't get the one time fee.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[aintnostranger]

Well, while we wait for our south american countries to become as nice as Hong Kong, we have families to feed. And without regulation, companies have screwed the workers as much as possible. We've had very low regulation periods (aka the 30s, 70s, 90s) and companies didn't use that to create jobs nor make the economy flourish but to ransack as much as they could. Hey, even banks like Citybank and Bank Boston (champions of the free market?) decided not to pay our bank deposits back in 2001. So what did we do? We realized that very oftenly the champions of free markets are big hypocrites and that they would screw us unless we set regulations. Its all nice to assume that you can stand up to your boss and demand better compensation/conditions, but here that has oftenly resulted in you becoming a good example for the rest of workers of what not to do. So, we have unions, and unions demand regulations. And thanks to that, conditions are better even for non union workers. And companies still do business here, because its still convenient to them. As soon as you have way more workers than jobs, things get ugly for workers. Hence the need for government regulation, investment, etc... It must have been a bit over 50 countries that bought the "super neoliberalism free market" thing in the 90s. Most flopped. It surprises me how a country (the US) that implements a lot of Keynesian (and less optimal, like military spending) measures is on so much denial about it. To build the interstate system it had to be shown as a military/strategic thing, because that'd be good, but making it just to boost the economy or give people more comfortable travel would be a communist horror.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

You had me until you made the stupid insult against my country.

We are well aware companies do bad things all the time. My point was that the companies are not paying for overtime. They won't do it. So the new rule is going to be disabling the email.

Please save the juvenile insults.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[doshell]

Worker safety laws are a coercion of freedom.

They certainly are, but society has decided that it has a moral authority to enact some worker safety laws because members of the society are sometimes incapable of assessing risk in various working scenarios

I don't think that's the reason why worker safety laws exist. The problem is not so much the fact that I as a worker am unable to assess risk, but rather that I might end up in a world where all jobs that are available to me are risky, as there is no incentive for employers to take measures to eliminate those risks.

At this point, free-market types will argue that, if enough workers refuse to work for the risky jobs, there will be demand for an employer that actually takes measures to eliminate them, thus making a more competitive offer to prospective employees. Except that oftentimes the labor market does not work that way: usually the employer can afford not to hire someone, but that someone cannot afford to be unemployed. Doubly so in an economy with a high unemployment rate, and triply so for jobs that require little to no qualification --- and ironically, those are usually the riskier ones.

Here's the way I see it: worker safety laws are a way to correct the distortions in the labor market caused by the imbalance of bargaining power between employers and employees. If you don't have them, you will likely end up with something resembling feudalism more than a free market(*).

(*) I mean the one with all the nice properties put forth in microeconomics courses, not the "laissez-faire and hope for the best" approach.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

I agree... ideally one should be able to wave this whole overtime thing since a lot of employees aren't paid by the hour anyway. Just make it part of the law that no employer can coerce someone to wave the requirement and that it has to be voluntary.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[aintnostranger]

Yes you are. We have lots of legislation like that in my country and you can ask for whatever you want in whatever manner you want on top of the minimum.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Lumpy]

That's just the republican lip balm.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

We've had very low regulation periods (aka the 30s, 70s, 90s) and companies didn't use that to create jobs nor make the economy flourish but to ransack as much as they could.

You mention the 1930s, but that was a time of great instability in Brazil, with a revolution in 1930 and then a coup 7 years later.

Then you mention the 1970s, the period of Operation Condor and military dictatorships.

Then finally you mention the 1990s, which while removing the military dictatorship, only did so because hyperinflation was just kicking. Then you have the period of dual currencies, culminating in a great deflation of one while trying to stop the rapid inflation of the other.

Banks are not the champions of free market, and certainly not Americas. People are the champions of free market. Brazil does not seem to have had a period where a free market and stability existed together for any length of time. Remember that strong property rights and strong contract law go hand in hand with free markets, fostering trust that you develop is yours, and that agreements will be honored (one way or another.)

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

We have lots of legislation like that in my country and you can ask for whatever you want in whatever manner you want on top of the minimum.

Minimum what? Wage? Aha.

Brazil just decided that I must accept at a minimum an hourly rate that is greater than my regular rate ("overtime rate"), rather than that I might simply accept, for example, a piece rate.

This can only have a downward pressure on my regular rate. Thanks a lot.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Hentes]

Countries like Hong Kong seem to do OK with very few regulations, because their over-supply of workers induced more businesses to start up inevitably reducing that over-supply of workers.

Do you really try to compare the economy of a city-state to a huge country like Brazil?

America was the same as they used to let anyone in the world come here, and by the millions per year they did. By the end of that period America had the most diverse and powerful economy on the planet.

Being the most powerful economy doesn't do much good when only a few percent of the citizens gets a share of that booming economy due to inequalities.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Rockoon]

as there is no incentive for employers to take measures to eliminate those risks

There was strong pressure to increase safety in the U.S because of worker compensation laws passed in 1908. Now thats not a law that says you must increase safety.. thats a law that says that you must compensate injured workers. The economics of it is what increased general safety. All other safety laws do not increase general safety, only specific safety failings where a worker cannot assess the real risks.

At this point, free-market types will argue that, if enough workers refuse to work for the risky jobs, there will be demand for an employer that actually takes measures to eliminate them, thus making a more competitive offer to prospective employees. Except that oftentimes the labor market does not work that way: usually the employer can afford not to hire someone, but that someone cannot afford to be unemployed. Doubly so in an economy with a high unemployment rate, and triply so for jobs that require little to no qualification

You dont have extended high unemployment in a free markets. See Hong Kong's history of unemployment. They have one of the best unemployment records in the world and its no coincidence that its the most free market. High unemployment is only sustainable under artificial constraints.

Hong Kong's worst unemployment rate in the past 30 years was 8.6%, and during that short period (the SARS epidemic) their currency actually deflated to compensate, with no harm to the economy. Meanwhile in America things like deflation are considered verboten, so the capital reserves that could be increasing in value and thus making it easier for startups and expansion are decreasing in value instead.. its crazy what we are doing to ourselves.

Hong Kong's unemployment has averaged only 3.77 percent over the past 30 years. The United States has not even seen a single year with unemployment rates as low as their 30 year average since 1968, 44 years ago. The danger in true free markets is not unemployment, its lack of unemployment. Unemployment seen is free markets is frictional rather than structural, and as such goes away quickly.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Anonymous Coward]

How is dictating that employees who do work must be paid for said work reducing freedom? Is it reducing freedom to outlaw theft, too?

Generally speaking, it's possible to contract around laws. In Canada, a collective agreement has the first priority, and then any areas not covered by the CA fall to the employment legislation.

Such contracts open the way for even more insane things. For example, one can then make a contract that "if we observe you using your smartphone to go to youtube five times in any given work week, you will pay a year of salary as fine".

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[sjames]

p>If your employer doesn't want you to do that, then your marketing failed. If it is wanted, your email won't be disabled. If you're marketing yourself for contractor work elsewhere, use your personal email.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[aintnostranger]

You mention the 1930s, but that was a time of great instability in Brazil, with a revolution in 1930 and then a coup 7 years later.

I'm not from Brazil. I'm from Argentina.

Then you mention the 1970s, the period of Operation Condor and military dictatorships.

Dictatorships that were supported by big companies. Ford Motor Company would single out to the government which union representatives they wanted taken out and the goverment dissapeared them. Same with big local companies.

Then finally you mention the 1990s, which while removing the military dictatorship, only did so because hyperinflation was just kicking. Then you have the period of dual currencies, culminating in a great deflation of one while trying to stop the rapid inflation of the other.

The last dictatorship here ended in 1983. We didn't have dual currencies.

Banks are not the champions of free market, and certainly not Americas. People are the champions of free market. Brazil does not seem to have had a period where a free market and stability existed together for any length of time. Remember that strong property rights and strong contract law go hand in hand with free markets, fostering trust that you develop is yours, and that agreements will be honored (one way or another.)

Sounds all nice, but a real free market is under many circumstances, outside of the political possibilites. Show me a big country in the world with real free markets. Even the US has strong subsidies/barriers for its agriculture.

. People are the champions of free market.

I kinda agree with that, I think we haven't seen much of a real free market around here. Has a lot to do with the free market proponents around here usually working on behalf of a big multinational company. But also, free market is very detrimental some times. For example, in the 90s we stopped inflation via something called "convertibilidad", and then lifted all barriers to imports while removing all kinds of subsidy. We saw that our railroads were not profitable. We closed them. Result? 20% Unemployment and a big bad recession. How we got out? Devaluation to be competitive again, import tariffs, taxes on exports (possible due to the devaluation). The bad side was that people's savings got its worth destroyed. The good side is we got jobs again, and the state got money to kickstart the economy. With that money we are now paying for good state technical education, state technical R&D, etc... all things that have the potential to make our local companies more competitive. Then we can start lifting barriers and making the market more free. Markets need protection while they mature. 100% free market policies are only good for those in a position of advantage.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[aintnostranger]

They're not paying over time. Governments might be dumb enough to do it but corps just won't. So they'll find some way to not do it. They don't really need employees to respond to company emails outside of work time anyway.

A lot of companies will find it worth the money to pay it and keep on it. Others wont. It's fair both ways for workers and companies.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

Generally... it's going to make companies unhappy and there are all sorts of consequences when employers get upset. Like... not employing as many people.

Anyway, it's brazil, so I don't really care...

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[lvxferre]

Actually, both lawing that workers must be paid and outlawing theft are banning the same little liberty: to enjoy other people's work for free.
However - of course this liberty goes against lots of other bigger liberties, so if we aim for maximum liberty, we need to stop this one.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[aintnostranger]

. it's going to make companies unhappy

I care if they are viable or not, profitable or not. I care more about people's happines than companies.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Jessified]

troll troll troll. By God, I think you're on to something. Not being required to pay wages for time worked increases liberties for everyone!! I think the communists and slave owners probably agree with you.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Jessified]

PS I may have misunderstood your post as arguing against being required to pay for overtime. I was having a hard time tracking all the "this liberty that liberty"

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you talking about India or the United States?

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/01/28/business/economy/economix-28milanovic/economix-28milanovic-custom1.jpg

It's also worth mentioning that the Gini coefficient used to dismiss the US as a hellhole of inequality is the one that disregards transfer payments: Once those have been taken into account, the number is within 5 points of such anarcho-capitalist, dog-eat-dog countries as Canada and Australia.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[doshell]

You dont have extended high unemployment in a free markets. See Hong Kong's history of unemployment. They have one of the best unemployment records in the world and its no coincidence that its the most free market. High unemployment is only sustainable under artificial constraints.

Is it a result of economic theory that it's not a coincidence? If it is, I would be truly interested if you could point me to a proof. It seems to me that the argument that unemployment in a free market leads to the creation of new jobs only holds if you assume that an excess in supply always leads to a corresponding increase in demand. I'm sure there is more than one counterexample to that.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[nosferatu1001]

Which is the desired outcome in a rational society, just a very easy way rather than directly legislating.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

The wealth of nations is directly related to their productivity. Just be careful that you don't reduce the productivity of the economy or everyone suffers.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Anonymous Coward]

He very clearly mentioned the US during those time periods. He was very clearly not talking about Brazil during those periods. You very clearly didn't read his post very clearly.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[SwedishPenguin]

Prior to the "free market" reforms of the early 90's, Sweden had an unemployment rate hovering around 1-4%. Of course for those advocating the current "free market" system, that is below the rate of unemployment preferred, workers should be sufficiently desperate to take crap jobs at crap salaries. The current unemployment rate is about 8%.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Registered Coward v2]

Brazil is a leftist country, which means they take workers' rights seriously. You see, as there is a competition in a labour market, without regulations like minimal wage or overtime pay the companies could just require workers to work more for less pay, because there would always be someone else to take the job. By regulating overtime, the state ends the competition between the workers, thus solving the prisoners dilemma scenario and resulting in an environment that's better for everyone.

You got the economics of that wrong. The people who benefit are the ones who have jobs - but employers only have so much money to pay for wages, and as a result hire fewer people. Great if you have a job, bad if you don't. In addition, employers look to ways to minimize hiring while still increasing staff - so you often get temporary contracts that are of a very limited duration. That way, they don't have to fire you they simply don't renew the contract.

A national minimum wage also reduce competition between company its by requiring areas that would have lower labor costs to pay more, reducing the incentive for companies to locate their business there. If they could locate in lower wage areas they would reduce prices and those companies in high wage areas would lose business. A minimum wage is not a bad idea, but it is not just a way to protect workers.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Hentes]

If there is less overtime, that in fact creates more jobs, as employers will have to hire additional people to do the same work. And if some companies move out, you just increase the customs on their product so they will have to get back inside if they want to sell.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Registered Coward v2]

If there is less overtime, that in fact creates more jobs, as employers will have to hire additional people to do the same work.

Only if the overtime costs are greater than the costs of hiring and the expected revenue form the hire exceeds the costs- otherwise they will simply forgo hiring. Employers don't simply say they need to do x work - the say they need to do x work at y cost; so reducing x without reducing the input to y doesn't work.

And if some companies move out, you just increase the customs on their product so they will have to get back inside if they want to sell.

Or the price of the goods simply increase by the cost of the tariff - and consumers buy less so the company makes less and must decide if they could be more profitable moving back. In addition, local competitors see the price rise and either grab market share - or raise prices to increase profits at a lower volume. This ignores, of course, the impact of the new location adding tariffs as a retaliatory measure; and that in many areas you don't have inter-entity tariffs (such as the US and the EU).

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Stormthirst]

Strange that Brazil's economy is improving such that they are now the 6th largest global economy. Guess they feel they can afford it.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Stormthirst]

I don't think it's juvenile at all. I think it's entirely accurate. Having worked for both American and British companies - the work life balance in American companies is a complete imbalance.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

Well, enjoy your decline then. In the US, we're going to fight the fall.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

all things are relative. Brazil is an island of sanity in a sea of madness. if her neighbors weren't completely kookoo for coco puffs then they might not be able to get away with it. But since they are they can probably do almost anything and stay competitive.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[timeOday]

Countries like Hong Kong seem to do OK with very few regulations

Welcome to libertarian utopia!

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Stormthirst]

So let me get this straight. You don't want a work life balance. That you'd rather get paid to do an 8 hour day - but work a 16 hour one instead?

And by fight the fall - do you mean that 14 trillion dollar credit card bill that's only getting worse because the gutless Republicans won't put up taxes to pay for the stuff they've already bought? (By that I mean the 6.2 trillion dollars worth of tax cuts, and two wars of dubious origins - all done under Republican Dubbya Bush)

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

Well you've unmasked yourself as an ultra partisan.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, comrade.

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Stormthirst]

If I could remember what the Communist party salute was, I'd use it. :D

Re:They'll just disable email on a schedule

[Karmashock]

I think it involves throwing women and children to a gulag to starve...

Of course they can

[Anonymous Coward]

If you work overtime, you can claim overtime. News at 11.

nothing new

[queequeg1]

This isn't new, isn't specific to smartphones, and (as noted in the article) isn't unique to Brazil. Many employers have the ability to allow employees to check work email remotely from their home PCs. However, most sophisticated employers (or perhaps more paranoid) are careful about opening up such access to non-exempt employees (i.e. employees who are paid on an hourly basis) because of wage and hour issues. My employer (a US healthcare system) requires non-exempt employees to get manager permission before remote access is enabled and even then there are explicit rules about when the employees should be accessing email remotely. Compliance can be easily monitored but, conversely, wage and hour problems can also be easily proven through log in records.

Re:nothing new

[JoeMerchant]

Last place I worked that handed out Blackberries only gave them to exempt employees.

It's about time.

[QuietLagoon]

It is about time that companies pay their employees for the work done. My manager once told me that he expected me to answer work emails until 9pm each weekday evening, and all day on Saturdays and Sundays. He effectively double the length of my work week, and there was no compensation for it.

Re:It's about time.

[green1]

If you are on salary, it is often hard to argue as the work day may have relatively loosely defined hours. However now that I get paid hourly I tun my work phone off at the end of my shift, and it doesn't turn back on again until the start of the next one. I have to give my phone number to every customer, I asked my employer if they would pay me to answer it outside of work hours, they said no, so I turn it off to eliminate the problem. In an emergency, if my employer wants me to come in to work (with pay) they have my personal phone number and can call me. This has happened occasionally, and is always accompanied by a charge for a minimum of 2 hours of double-time pay.

Oh to be non-exempt

[ElmoGonzo]

The employers in the USA have pretty much figured this out already. I can't remember the last position I had where I wasn't exempt from overtime.

Re:Oh to be non-exempt

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. If such a law were passed in the US, it would do nothing for IT workers who are almost all exempt from overtime pay.

Re:Oh to be non-exempt

[Anonymous Coward]

That's only because the USA has very week employee protections. "Exempt" employment would be illegal in Europe, for example: the company I work for can not demand that I work beyond my contracted hours, and can not demand that I work more than 48 hours in any given week[1]. If they ask me to do overtime and I agree to that, then fine, but most employees are smart enough to ask for something in turn. Even if you're salaried, that's usually overtime (on top of your salary) or time off in lieu.

[1]: Slightly more complex as it's 96 hours over any two week period, and I can waive that right if I wish. I have.

Re:Oh to be non-exempt

[green1]

Here it's also 48 hours per week, but instead of being per two week period, it's averaged per quarter. Officially the contract I have with my employer does allow for mandatory overtime, in 12 years they have used it once... and anyone with half a made up excuse managed to get out of it, and there was still enough of a backlash to that one that I don't see them trying it again any time soon. Generally they call and offer overtime, and if you say no they call the next guy. If you say yes, you bill them a minimum of 2 hours of double-time pay. As for email and other things, my blackberry from work gets turned off every day at the end of my shift. In an emergency my employer has my personal phone number, and know that if they use it they have to be willing to pay me that minimum of 2 hours of double-time pay.

The first one to claim email overtime . . .

[PolygamousRanchKid]

. . . will be the last one to receive a promotion . . .

Dynamically weight and sort promotion list based on willingness to do overtime email for free.

Patent this.

Re:The first one to claim email overtime . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait wait. You have to make sure your patent contains the language "on a computer". Just to make sure it'll be an easy score.

Re:The first one to claim email overtime . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

That's even older than "over a network"... get with the program man. It's "on a mobile device" nowadays! Besides, the patent would be useless in the US anyway. Nobody gets a raise here. If you do, it's so minuscule it won't even cover inflation. The only way to get a "raise" in the US is to change jobs.

Re:The first one to claim email overtime . . .

[Rich0]

This sort of thing happens with all kinds of workplace regulations - usually with safety regs (give everybody access to safety equipment that makes them less productive, but fire the slowest people every week and watch as nobody uses it).

The solution is to place the onus of compliance on the employer. If an inspector walks in and sees people without safety gear the employer gets fined $1M even if the gear was made available to the employees. The local management should ensure that employees use safety gear, and fire people who refuse to do so.

The same thing works for overtime pay. Do an audit of the server logs, pick 10 people who logged in after hours, and then check their payroll for the same period of time and see if overtime was paid. If the employee didn't claim overtime, then fine the employer $1M. Pretty soon you'll see employers bending over backwards to make sure people get paid.

However, all of this depends on enforcement. You can write all the laws you want and they're worthless if you don't enforce them...

True in California Too

[Anonymous Coward]

The test for whether you are "on the clock" is whether you are under the control of your employer. If you are at home, but required to respond to email, you are on the clock. Simple as that.

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Public/Pamphlets/Employee.aspx#6

So can I...

[JoeMerchant]

I have a Brazilian boss, and I can claim overtime for answering e-mail from home, too...

Won't make a damn bit of difference in my paycheck, since I'm on salary, and we have the 70+ club for people who work 70+ hours a week - I think the club members got a T-shirt last year, or maybe it was a ball cap, anyway, all those hours over 40 sure are appreciated, hardly compensated at all, but appreciated.

Re:So can I...

[Anonymous Coward]

70+ hours a week... hardly compensated?!

Are you mad? Surely no sane person would work a minute over time without being paid?

overtime for email?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've worked for various Federal Government contractors (SAIC Unisys BAE) over for the past 10 years. This is common practice and is billable to the client. It is detailed in the weekly progress report.

A requirement at my U.S. Company.

[pro151]

Any time worked off the clock, whether it be via E-mail or phone will be logged and turned in for payment. To not do so is grounds for termination.

Hah, that's nothing!

[Anonymous Coward]

One guy here in Brazil had an accident at work and lost a finger... we made it President... of the fscking country!

How's that for compensation?

Good News

[assertation]

Sounds like great news, can't make other comments.

I like that idea

[msobkow]

When I worked for NorTel, we got a 3-hour "callout" if we had to deal with an issue we were paged for, so carrying a pager could actually be a nice perk if you could deal with the hassle of nightly calls for an unreliable system.

But it's been a long time since I've seen a company that would pay callouts.

Maybe the employers and customers who used to call me during off-work hours would have stopped if I'd been greedy enough to bill them a 3-hour callout when they did so, instead of letting them abuse the emergency services concept over trivial stuff that could have easily waited until tomorrow or been handled through email that I can ignore until the morning.

Re:I like that idea

[mjwalshe]

Well I used to work for British Telecom and on call was a perk I knew people working in some teams that where on 4 in 4 they got called about once a month form what I remember it was around $600 a week just for being on call plus TOIL at OT rates on top of that.

Already Do That

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been doing that in the US for years... who wouldn't??

my formula to pay the off hours overtime

[renegade600]

in order to pay overtime for reading emails off the clock, the company must first subtract the time the employees spend on slashdot, facebook, checking personal emails and other websites while on the clock. Seems to me most employees would owe the companies.

Hong Kong workers literally live in cages

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2084971/Hong-Kongs-cage-homes-Tens-thousands-living-6ft-2ft-rabbit-hutches.html

So I guess you are just plain wrong about Hong Kong.

Employers are rapists

[Anonymous Coward]

I think there should be a law that if an employee asks the CEO of a company to take his kid to school, MAYBE the CEO could bill the employee for it.
Oh wait... that NEVER happens, but he’ll ask you to take time FROM YOUR FUCKING FAMILY AND FRIENDS AND PERSONAL LIFE, to
DO SHIT FOR HIM, so he can PROFIT FROM YOUR FREE WORK!

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE????????????????

I won’t reply to an e-mail offhours even if it’s somebody asking for help
as they are being cut down to pieces by some psycho.
I’d buy the DVD though, and piss on it, and then dig the body out of the
grave and fuck its ass.

Employees owe NOTHING - NOT A FUCKING THINK - to employers.

I’ve gotten a few jobs with the INTENT of seeing how much I can get away
with with being CORRECT.
Let me repeat things for you retarded lemmings: I have gotten jobs
with the sole intention of seeing how long I can go without being
fired by DOING THE RIGHT THING at all times.
It goes from 6 to 12 months.

Unless you are willing to be a lil bitch and get fucked in the ass, you
WILL get fired.

There is only one solution, bitches, don’t get raped: become the rapist.

Start a company, and hire fucktards with a family to support and
then fuck them in the ass with unpaid overtime and generally
making them your bitches!!!! They’ll do it, cause they are thinking
OF THE CHILDREN.

Fucking cowards. Stand up for yourselves, fucking douches!

Nobody makes me their bitch.

P.S. - Don’t mistake my anger for being a poor professional.
I AM A FUCKING GOD. My anger derives from having a small
penis - still, I am right about this shit.

Re:Employers are rapists

[Dan541]

Fucking cowards. Stand up for yourselves,

Says the person posting anonymously.

What's the link?

[Anonymous Coward]

"With smartphones becoming more and more common, the push for employees to work after hours is becoming greater."

Where's the link between these two? I mean, I know people *can* check their email on their phone, but I doubt many employers have seen this and thought "Oh hey, he's got an iPhone, he can work overtime". It just doesn't make sense to me

Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

Say UNION YES!

Teaching

[Anonymous Coward]

As a teacher, I know I've spent a fair few hours each semester writing up e-mails replying to my students.

Now, if I got paid for all the times I've stayed late, came in early, worked over lunch, or dropped in on a weekend, I'd be damn rich.

Re:Teaching

[MurukeshM]

Good for you that you're getting paid at all. I know of plenty of govt (either public or grant-supported) schools here in India where the teacher's salaries are months overdue.

Email

[NetNinja]

I was at a job that thought email was an instant means of communication and if you did not respond to the email that were burried under the weight of MT Everest they would yell at you.
Not to mention emails that came in at 9:00pm you were expected to answer them the first thing when you came into the office. I mean really? Seriously email has gotteno out of hand people think it's a religion.

Last time I checked

[sirlark]

being required to answer work communications after hours was called being 'being on call', and yes you were paid for it... Good for Brazil

Re:Last time I checked

[sjames]

It is SUPPOSED to be called on-call and result in pay, but more than a few employers like to cheat on that. I agree, good for Brazil for banning the cheat.