Slashdot Mirror
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."
Who is responsible for being so fair to workers? We'd never get that here (meaning US.)
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.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
1. Team up with a co-worker.
2. Exchange a long string of emails back and forth each evening.
3. Profit!
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.
Not paying overtime by not requiring overtime work is exactly the purpose of this legislation I believe. What is wrong with that?
Then that would imply the managers aren't working, since the manager's job is to make sure the peons are working.
This is not the funny you're looking for.
. . . 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.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
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.
"His name was James Damore."
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.
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.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
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.
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
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.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
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?"
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
Fucking cowards. Stand up for yourselves,
Says the person posting anonymously.
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"