Posted on 04/02/2024 11:37:17 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
A bill introduced in the California legislature would help employees disconnect from their bosses after leaving work for the day.
Assembly Bill 2751, which would provide workers the “right to disconnect,” was introduced in February by Assembleymember Matt Haney of San Francisco, USA Today reported Tuesday.
“People now find themselves always on and never off,” Haney said, according to Business Insider. “The problem we have now is the gray area, where an employee is expected to respond all the time when on paper they work a 9-to-5 job.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Bye, employee. Hello, Robot.
The Gooberment is on our @$$ 24/7.
When do we get relief?
Turn off you phone, or don’t answer it. When I went to work for NY State Dept. of Corrections, the first thing they told me was to not answer my phone on my days off. I found out the hard way, when my first Christmas there, I had swapped work days with another officer in order to get Christmas off. I had already worked Thanksgiving for the a-hole. Christmas Day, I’m cooking our dinner, and my phone rings. I stupidly answered it, and was told that the a-hole never showed up to cover my shift, so I was ordered to go in to work. I had no choice. I went. And of course, nothing happened to the a-hole, because he was one of the good old boys in the prison, and I was a new female hack. That was the last time I ever answered my phone on any day I had off.
More solutions looking for problems.
How often do pols nag their slaves after hours, and how would they react if one were to hang up on them?
More to the point, they just want jurisdiction over every moment of your existence.
How in the hell does CA have the authority to do this crap. Mandating a min wage is outrageous enough but this is beyond.
The problem is for service jobs like HVAC. The employer only has work when they get a call from a customer. If an employer was required to pay people to sit home then the customer bill would skyrocket. But liberals don’t understand things like that.
So much for “on call”.
People have always had the right to disconnect.
More campaign issues, for they are trying desperately trying to win back voters that they are hemorrhaging in significant numbers. That’s one reason they never codified abortion. It gave them a campaign talking point should abortion ever be overruled by the Supreme Court.
I don’t know there’s a lot of this. Bosses calling employees at random hours “I was looking at this can you answer a question”. And this seems to have gotten more so with WFH. We can say the employee should stand strong, but, let’s face it, we all got bills to pay and getting fired isn’t fun.
Now can the government adequately do anything about this? Probably not. But it is a definitely bad trend that needs reversing.
I had no problem disconnecting from bosses. When one of them wanted my cell phone number, it was a big, “No”. Of course, it depends on your position, whether salaried, etc.
“The problem we have now is the gray area, where an employee is expected to respond all the time when on paper they work a 9-to-5 job.”
Then if the contract signed is for 9 to 5, then just say “no, I can’t.” Then it becomes barter time on pay and other times off. If you need the money, then you shouldn’t have taken a job that doesn’t pay you enough. If you want the money or a better time to get off, that is your choice.
I got into this when I working for the department of the army and they insisted I come in for special duties not within my job description. I told them no and they got mad but there was nothing they could do about it. If they had terminated me for not working overtime, they would have seen the court room and I’ll guarentee you I’d have won the case because they didn’t put it in the job description and it was not within my regular hours or was going to be made up during the week. They told me it was in other duties as assigned. I reminded them that they had established my schedule for my approval of taking the position and that was weekends off. I was smart enough to get that in writing.
wy69
“The problem we have now is the gray area, where an employee is expected to respond all the time when on paper they work a 9-to-5 job.”
Then if the contract signed is for 9 to 5, then just say “no, I can’t.” Then it becomes barter time on pay and other times off. If you need the money, then you shouldn’t have taken a job that doesn’t pay you enough. If you want the money or a better time to get off, that is your choice.
I got into this when I working for the department of the army and they insisted I come in for special duties not within my job description. I told them no and they got mad but there was nothing they could do about it. If they had terminated me for not working overtime, they would have seen the court room and I’ll guarentee you I’d have won the case because they didn’t put it in the job description and it was not within my regular hours or was going to be made up during the week. They told me it was in other duties as assigned. I reminded them that they had established my schedule for my approval of taking the position and that was weekends off. I was smart enough to get that in writing.
wy69
Actually most of those businesses have 2 pay structures. What you get paid to be on call, and what you get paid doing the work. I doubt these folks are the problem because it’s long been built into their structure. People know when they’re on call, it’s scheduled. It’s the more office oriented work where you get a call and asked to reply to an email hours after your work day is done.
Or... what we used to call exempt and non-exempt workers, "exempt" meaning not allowed to receive overtime pay.
-PJ
That's the key phrase. As part of my duties in different jobs, I was on 24/7 call and had to respond anytime, even on Christmas and New Years Eve which I did. When I managed a crew of techs, they were also obligated to be on call 24/7 for emergencies. There were a couple of techs who often did not respond to my calls. When I recommended one of their co-workers for a supervisory position over them, they protested and asked "why?". I said she always responded, and they did not. She being a black female tech, and the two complainers hated blacks. It was all about who can do the job when needed. If not a job requirement on paper, then the worker shouldn't be called after hours.
FLSA exempt employees are basically always on the clock. Non-exempt hourly employees are on the clock for pay when they are on-call or conducting business for their firm. That would mean a phone call after hours is compensable. The problem with that is employers who decide not to compensate employees for the off hours calls are subject to both state and federal labor code penalties, which include interest and can be remarkably expensive.
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.