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

Skip to comments.

Labor to Young Americans: Work Less, Achieve Less
Townhall.com ^ | October 5, 2016 | Terry Jeffrey

Posted on 10/05/2016 10:25:28 AM PDT by Kaslin

A 25-year-old woman three years out of college earns a modest, but livable, salary in a professional position where she oversees the work of several other young people.

She works eight-to-ten hours every weekday -- then goes home and takes a three-mile walk.

When she is walking, she sometimes thinks about her job and how she can make those she supervises more productive.

One night on her walk, she has a brilliant idea, which she starts implementing at work the next day. This idea makes the jobs of her subordinates easier, more enjoyable and more productive. It makes the family-owned business she works for more profitable.

It puts her on a faster track to career advancement and a higher salary.

It is a win-win-win situation -- in a free and capitalist nation.

It is what America is all about.

So, when this young woman came up with that great idea about her job on a three-mile walk after a 10-hour workday was she working or having private time?

The truth is it is nobody's business but her own -- because she was pursuing the American Dream.

Yet regulators at the U.S. Department of Labor think it is their business to monitor and control how many hours Americans like this work.

On Dec. 1, a new federal regulation takes effect that forces employers to pay overtime to a salaried employee who works more than 40 hours in a week unless that employee already earns a salary of at least $913 per week (or $47,476 per year).

This alters an existing regulation that puts the minimum salary threshold for salaried workers who must be paid overtime at $23,660 per year.

The new regulation also includes a provision that every three years will automatically increase the minimum salary employers must pay salaried workers to avoid paying them overtime. In 2020, the regulation estimates, it will rise to $51,168.

The Department of Labor published an analysis that indicates that the new regulation will initially expand the number of salaried workers eligible for mandatory overtime pay by 4.2 million.

Sixty-one percent of these 4.2 million workers are 44 years of age or younger, according to the analysis. Fifty-three percent have a college degree or an advanced degree.

This regulation means that if an employer hires a 22-year-old college graduate and starts paying her a salary of $38,000 per year the day she receives her diploma, the employer will have to pay that 22-year-old salaried worker overtime pay whenever she works more than 40 hours in a week.

A hard-working, ambitious young person who is excited about her job, sees great potential in it, wants to do it to the best of their ability, and sees an opportunity to have significant positive impact on her co-workers, her employer, her community and perhaps even her country, is ordinarily a great asset to the organization that hires her.

This is the person who understands that excelling at an entry-level job is the first step on the path to excelling in any profession.

This is the person driven to work more hours precisely because she can achieve more and be more effective at her job by dedicating more time to it. She is willing to make the sacrifice because she loves what she does and is looking to advance in her profession, not stay in place.

But the Department of Labor's new regulation could turn the most focused and ambitious workers into a financial liability. Their commitment to hard work, to putting in the hours necessary to do the job well, could price them out of the market for some employers -- and reduce the overall number of jobs available.

"By increasing the number of workers who are eligible for overtime when they work more than 40 hours in a week, employers will have a choice," the Department of Labor said in a summary of the rule. "They can either increase their employers' salaries to at least the new salary threshold, pay workers the overtime premium for extra hours, or limit their work to 40 hours in a week."

The regulators made clear that their aim was to reduce the amount of work salaried workers do.

"Under this rule, employers will have a renewed monetary incentive to support work-life balance," said the summary. "Many workers will put in fewer hours without seeing a reduction in pay, giving them more time to spend with their families and in their personal pursuits."

The Labor Department's message to young hard-working Americans is: Work less, and achieve less.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: deptoflabor; minimumwage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 10/05/2016 10:25:28 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Some people are more efficient than others. Why not pay for output rather than inputs?


2 posted on 10/05/2016 10:27:47 AM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Because you would be putting a salaried person in the position of controlling your labor cost by working any overtime they please.


3 posted on 10/05/2016 10:37:59 AM PDT by sparklite2 (When they play the race card, play the Trump card.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
So when my daughter who is on salary travels for work, left this morning on a 7am flight and won't be back until 6 or 7 tonight then she is working overtime? What hours does the government consider working, the commute to the airport, is she working then? the one hour she is waiting for the plane due to the government wanting us to arrive an hour before boarding, is that work? Then sitting on the plane, catching a taxi, checking into her hotel, if she is overnighting it, all work for the company? Who the hell is going to figure all this out?

What the f**k is government doing dictating pay, hours and what salaried employees are willing to do for their employer? The Labor department, the federal workers that make more in retirement than most citizens make working, decide what the relationship should be between two free people that enter into a work contract, they want to shove themselves into the middle of that, assholes all of them.

4 posted on 10/05/2016 10:40:20 AM PDT by thirst4truth (America, What difference does it make?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
Some people are more efficient than others.

Long ago on a crew I managed, one technician would not work one minute past quitting time. We'd be at a remote site, needed another ten minutes to finish, but he wanted to come back on a weekend and get overtime including travel. When I protested, he would simply throw his tool bag down and leave. Another worker would do the job for me. The first guy would use up all his sick time on Mondays, consistently, and do other things to work less while getting more overtime. He told me I was foolish for wanting more productivity and not using the system. He was union, nice otherwise, and did nothing to merit being fired.

Years later, I began to realize he was the smart one and was being efficient about acquiring more pay.

5 posted on 10/05/2016 10:41:35 AM PDT by roadcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: roadcat

I’ve always lived below my means and highly value my own short time on Erf. Working makes you a gov’t tax slave. I don’t remember regretting not spending more time at work even though it was largely enjoyable.


6 posted on 10/05/2016 10:56:26 AM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: roadcat

Run your own business with him as an employee and see if you still call him ‘smart’, or if you have no reason to fire him.


7 posted on 10/05/2016 10:59:08 AM PDT by RoadGumby (This is not where I belong, Take this world and give me Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Yet regulators at the U.S. Department of Labor think it is their business to monitor and control how many hours Americans like this work.

Actually that's EXACTLY the mission given to them by law, when they were established in 1913. A tiger is a tiger.


8 posted on 10/05/2016 11:03:27 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thirst4truth

I’m wondering how this is going to affect churches. We have two youth pastors; one is part time, the other is full time but it isn’t an exorbitant salary by any measure and is under the Federal floor. Each one is the leader of a week long summer mission trip for the church youth. This year the full-time high school pastor was at the church at 3:30 a.m. Sunday to leave on the trip and did not return until 8:30 p.m. the following Saturday.

My calculation is that the church would owe him for 121.5 hours of overtime in that pay period. Let’s just say this isn’t in the church’s business plan.


9 posted on 10/05/2016 11:03:35 AM PDT by henkster (Better to be Pavlov's Dog than Schroedinger's Cat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
So, the paragon in the article works 10 hours a day and then comes home to walk 3 miles then gets ready for bed? Who's taking care of the children? Does she have children?

If she has children, they're being neglected. Where does the responsibility of having a normal family life enter in? Or, are our globalist fascist masters (Jorge Busho, O'Dummy, et al) going to deny us that?

And, if wage earners have children, are they going to be required to earn less as well? To require our children to similarly live on less?

And, in the end, will these (above mentioned) globalist pigs also be living on less?

10 posted on 10/05/2016 11:11:30 AM PDT by LouAvul (The most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I get it.

The regulation makes sense if you think of someone making $15 an hour and working straight time for 60 hours - they’d make about $900.

If the minimum wage is $15 and if employers can circumvent it by calling someone “salaried” just so they can pay them less than minimum wage then that’s evading the minimum wage law for many states.

Since the Fedgov has to have one rule for all fifty states then it makes sense to have the effective minimum wage for a salaried employee who works 60 hours a week to be at least equal to $15 an hour.


11 posted on 10/05/2016 11:21:16 AM PDT by MeganC (JE SUIS CHARLES MARTEL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Don’t forget the obamacare mandates. Package all these Obamandates and it sounds great. Free time off. Free college. Free health care. Work when and only when you want. No overtime...

That is just a way to say, you’re fired. Even if you want to work overtime and extra hours. This will have the opposite effect. The entry level or low level professionals will never advance and the old timers will never be challenged by new talent. Just another long lasting effect of Obamanation. Enjoy the ride Millenials. If you vote for Clinton it’s just 8 more years, and more likely, forever Obamanation.


12 posted on 10/05/2016 11:22:38 AM PDT by Organic Panic (Hillary Clinton, the elderly woman's version of "I dindu nuffins.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Organic Panic

Excellent point.


13 posted on 10/05/2016 11:23:31 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

Most businesses know how to get around paying increased minimum wages. Cutting the hours is another one.


14 posted on 10/05/2016 11:27:09 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"Under this rule, employers will have a renewed monetary incentive to support work-life balance," said the summary. "Many workers will put in fewer hours without seeing a reduction in pay, giving them more time to spend with their families and in their personal pursuits."

And all you little robots will react exactly the way we social overseers at the DOL say you will. And with the wonders of Obamacare...

“You want to be a photographer or a writer or a musician, whatever -- an artist, you want to be self-employed, if you want to start a business, you want to change jobs, you no longer are prohibited from doing that because you can’t have access to health care, especially because you do not want to put your family at risk,”-Nasty Pelosi
15 posted on 10/05/2016 11:28:31 AM PDT by Organic Panic (Hillary Clinton, the elderly woman's version of "I dindu nuffins.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

IMO this regulation is aimed primarily at the retail industry which would put people on salary and give them a “manager” title, but work them 60-80 hours per week stocking freight and ringing cash registers.


16 posted on 10/05/2016 11:33:34 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

How much time someone spends with family is their business, not the government’s.


17 posted on 10/05/2016 11:37:47 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roadcat

Typical union mentality.


18 posted on 10/05/2016 11:40:11 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604
How much time someone spends with family is their business, not the government’s.

As I pointed out in my previous post, the government MADE it their business when they passed the law establishing DOL in 1913. And it's been doing exactly that for over a century. Your argument should be to repeal the law and to abolish that agency.


19 posted on 10/05/2016 11:41:53 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

And fast food.


20 posted on 10/05/2016 11:44:08 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

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.

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