Posted on 07/20/2013 5:31:08 AM PDT by Oshkalaboomboom
My son recently started a job that has a 37.5 hour work week and asked me why 37.5 instead of 40? I couldn't really come up with a good answer. You could say it saves the employer money assuming they get the same amount of productivity but I don't know if that actually happens. Or it could be the person who founded the business came from a country where a 37.5 hour work week is more common than here in the USA. I did a lot of searching and found some companies transitioning to 37.5 but no real explanation as to why or what the advantage was. So I turn to the people who know it all, the Freepers, for answers.
An answer fit for Democratic Underground, raybbr.
If a 37.5 hour work week still gets the job done AND helps the company make MORE money, wouldn’t it be the fiduciary responsibility of the “corporate Weenies” to enact it?
I wonder if you are on the right site or if you should take that class warfare someplace else....
More than likely as others have said it is lunch. If the job runs 3 shifts then probably at one point they had a 20 min paid lunch. By going to a 30 min unpaid they only loose 10 min productivity but save 20 min pay each day. If they still had 8 hr work days with the 30 min unpaid lunch then they would end up with 2 people at most stations at shift changes for 30 min.
“My guess if it is a factory, the base hours are 37.5 to prevent having to pay overtime if they need workers to work a couple of extra hours during a week. I have heard of this before.”
I worked a 37.5 hour week at State Street Bank. And you’re right, it saves on overtime because you have to get to 40 to begin getting overtime.
In reality, though, it didn’t make any difference to me from my previous job. Instead of working 830-5 with an hour for lunch, I was working 9-5 with a half hour lunch. Then I got a job working 830-530 with an hour lunch. It all evens out.
it makes it a challenge for me to reach my clients if they cant take a phone call, just saying
Having been a factory worker, i would also venture to say overtime buffer. It’s sad but true.
I think that 37.5 hrs is considered part time so benefits wouldn’t have to be offered- such as retirement and insurance.
5 30-minute lunches = 2.5 hours
40 - 2.5 = 37.5 hours
in a 40 hr week he isn’t getting paid to eat lunch
Correct. I had a 37.5 hr/week job back in 1972. The salaried people worked 40-plus hours/week but the wage-grunts were expected to AVOID overtime to save employer money. The salaried folks got paid the same for 40 hours or 50...
The company I worked for prior to the job I have now had a 37 ½ hour work week. We worked 8:30AM to 5:00PM with 1 hour unpaid lunch. Then the company (3rd party health insurance administrator and insurance broker) decided to move us to a 40 work week. We were told we could either work 8:00AM to 5:00PM with a 1 hour unpaid lunch or 8:30AM to 5:00PM with a half hour unpaid lunch but once you made the choice of which schedule you were going to work, it was permanent.
But the kicker was they told us that they were making an “adjustment” to our pay so that we would bring home the same amount of money on a weekly basis. Of course all of us, many of us were hourly, quickly saw this as a pay cut. But management kept insisting it wasn’t since we were still bringing home the same weekly wage.
If arbitrarily cutting everyone's pay in half helps the company make more money wouldn't it....?
Why not?
When I started my first job after I graduated from college in 1976 at Bell Labs they had 37.5 hour work weeks. After many years there they changed to 40.
Is it a plant that goes 24 hours a day? With a half hour lunch that would be three shifts.
Everyone I know who's salaried puts in more than 8 hours per day.
Our kid works for a Fortune 100, and he's salaried, but they have a policy that up to 45 hours per week is included in the salary. If they have weeks where they're putting in time, sometimes an extra 15 or so hours over the 45, then they get paid what their hourly wage would be for anything over the 45 hours.
But the rest of us who are salaried work more than 40...not complaining, pay is good, just sayin'.
Probably not as HCR mandates that workers who work an average of 30 hours per week must be eligible for "affordable" healthcare coverage.
Sounds like five days a week, eight hours a day less half an hour a day for lunch. I worked many years for a company that did this. Of course any of us on salary just worked 'til the work was done. For most of my life the clock has been a guide, not a slave master.
There are jobs that can rightfully be timed. For all jobs after beginning of the information revolution, common sense and mutual agreement between the employee and employer should be the guide.
The first place I worked about 25 years ago was a 37.5. We weren’t allowed on “the floor” until about 5-10 before the start of the shift, were expected to leave for 30 minutes, and couldn’t stay more than 5 minutes after the shift ended.
I temped at one point as a front desk person at a 200+ lawyer law firm. Not only were you required to leave for lunch, but you were relieved for some time in the morning and the afternoon as they didn’t want you leaving the reception area nor having more than a mug of tea or glass of water at the desk.
Non-exempts were I work are 40 hours + one hour for lunch. When I was non-exempt I want to go to one of the competitors because they are a 37.5 place and the 9 hour day can get really long. Salaried are expected to work 40 hours a week and have the same general schedule as the non-exempt employees. Of course several of us have weeks that are 50+ hours and then have a week or two where we really only need to be there about 20-30 hours.
Sixth response is Correct.
FReePers know it ALL!
3 shifts at 8 hours = 24 hours, add a half our lunch to all three shifts, that equals 24 hours on the clock, but 25.5 hours at the building. Simply remove 1/2 hour from each shift and you have seamless shift change with no overlap.
Now this would only work on a non automated, continuous flow, production line. With an automated production line some overlap is needed.
It’s what everyone said. It accounts for the 2.5 hours for 5 half hour lunches.
Then again, for those of us that are exempt, I don’t know anyone that works 40 hours. Personally I work a minimum of 55 hours a week and I eat lunch at my desk.
My company makes out big because between my partner and myself we work enough hours per week to justify a third employee which adds the cost of healthcare and other benefits.
they found a way to cut costs by not paying them for lunk breaks
I would love to see everyone move to 3 10-hour days
I would pretty much do anything if I could have 4 day weekends every week, and as for the 10 hour days, heck I would work my ass off for 10 hours
This model also eliminates Obamacare mandates AND if you are industrious you work 2 different jobs and double your income
No. Federal law does not require meal breaks:
Federal law does not require lunch or coffee breaks. However, when employers do offer short breaks (usually lasting about 5 to 20 minutes), federal law considers the breaks as compensable work hours that would be included in the sum of hours worked during the work week and considered in determining if overtime was worked. Unauthorized extensions of authorized work breaks need not be counted as hours worked when the employer has expressly and unambiguously communicated to the employee that the authorized break may only last for a specific length of time, that any extension of the break is contrary to the employer's rules, and any extension of the break will be punished.
Bona fide meal periods (typically lasting at least 30 minutes), serve a different purpose than coffee or snack breaks and, thus, are not work time and are not compensable.
But as magellan said; some states do (only about half) and it is usually in most union contracts. And some states mandate breaks for workers under 18 years old but don’t for workers 18 and older although most employers for ease of administration will have the same meal and break rules for all workers.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/meal-rest-breaks-rights-employee-29773.html
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/meal-rest-breaks-rights-employee-29773.html
So in short what the DOL says is that if you offer short breaks, say 2-10 minute breaks during an 8 hour day, you have to pay them for those breaks as worked hours but if you have a 30 minute meal break, you don’t have to pay them for that time. But that is trumped by state law if the applicable state wage and hour laws are more generous to the worker. It always works that way and works that way regarding minimum wage – if the fed min wage is $7.25 and the state min wage is $8.25 you follow the state minimum wage but if a state says the min wage is $6.25 (and yes there are a few state with lower or no minimum wage) you follow the federal $7.25 minimum wage.
As far as docking workers for not taking an unpaid meal break if they actually worked through it is a big No-No everywhere, period, no exceptions. Employers must pay non-exempt workers for all time worked. Where I work, a manufacturer, if a non-exempt plant worker doesn’t take their unpaid meal break, we have to adjust their time card if the time clock auto deducts that time. We also require their supervisor to make a notation on their time card that the worker was authorized to work through their meal break. If the worker was not authorized to work through their meal break or works past their schedule and or overtime or fails to punch in or punch out, we still have to pay them for the time worked, but it becomes a disciplinary issue, they are assessed points just as we do for punching in too early or punching out late or calling out without sufficient notice. Once they accumulate a certain number of points during a one year period, they are terminated and this is clearly spelled out in the employee handbook and strictly and consistently enforced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.