Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 1010RD
Here's the thinking in 1958, under the Eisenhower administration.

In 1959, DOL again amended the white collar regulations, following a report and recommendations by Presiding Officer Harry Kantor, written in March 1958. Kantor determined that the salary tests should be set “at about the levels at which no more than about 10 percent of those in the lowest-wage region, or in the smallest-size establishment group, or in the smallest-sized city group, or in the lowest-wage industry of each of the categories would fail to meet the tests.” These levels worked out to $80 per week for executives and $95 per week for administrative and professional employees. To keep the previous ratio to the long test, Kantor recommended a short-test salary of $125 per week, or $862 in 2012 dollars.

I have no dog in this fight, but I think it's stupid to portray an attempt to return to roughly 1958 criteria as some sort of radical innovation.

http://www.epi.org/publication/inflation-adjusted-salary-test-bring-needed/

The original intent of the law was to exempt "high salary" employees. I assume nobody will argue that $23k doesn't constitute a high salary.

I can assure you that the rules are widely abused.

5 posted on 06/30/2015 3:50:07 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Sherman Logan

$862/week doesn’t equal a $23K annual salary. Check the median annual salary and get back to me. The change is radical and will result in further eroding the middle class.

The purpose isn’t to help anyone or make certain ‘labor rules’ are followed strictly. It’s to create a political wedge issue for the election. Anyone making $50,399.00 is included and overtime issues should be between the employer and the employee.


6 posted on 06/30/2015 3:59:58 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Sherman Logan

My girlfriend was made to “clock out” on her 10s , even though it’s the law in my state that employers must pay for 2 10 minute breaks in an 8 hour shift.

Or she would sometimes have to work till 15 minutes after. But if she clocked off at anything below 15 after. She wouldn’t be paid those x amount of minutes where x is 1-14.

Employers don’t care. Because if you sue an employer for violating wage laws, you’ll never work again because it’s on your background check. If you file a complaint with any business or employee bureaus they will investigate and straight up DROP YOUR NAME! It’s INSANE!


7 posted on 06/30/2015 4:12:30 AM PDT by FreedomStar3028 (Somebody has to step forward and do what is right because it is right, otherwise no one will follow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson