Congress rebuffs Bush, gives labor rare victories

The San Diego Union-Tribune ^ | September 13, 2003 | Leigh Strope - ASSOCIATED PRESS

[aynrandfreak]

This makes me angry

[John Beresford Tipton]

"administration proposals to rein in overtime pay,... and allow pension changes that cut benefits for older employees"

George, I know, and you surely prove each day, that you are not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but can you please repeat, possibly using cue cards, and a microphone/earpiece:

"Two terms good,
One term bad"?

[oceanview]

those cash balance pension deals are a total ripoff, the $$$s saved are instantly placed into the executive compensation basket, or the funds used to setup merger and acquisitions with the investment bankers and lawyers feeding at the trough, while retirees go without. It also forces older people to stay on the job longer, reducing opportunity for their jobs to be taken by younger workers when they retire.

[tahiti]

Amendment V:

"...nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

A federal law, mandating overtime pay is unconstitutional without a corresponding tax on all citizens to compensate private property owners for the loss of their private property for public use.

I have said it once, I will say it again.

The only difference between a Democrat and a Republican is the speed deeper into socialism/communism with a corresponding loss of property and liberty.

[oceanview]

well if that were true, then any workplace law that cost the employer money would be unconstitutional.

[Willie Green]

A federal law, mandating overtime pay is unconstitutional without a corresponding tax on all citizens to compensate private property owners for the loss of their private property for public use.

Overtime pay is confiscation of private property for public use???

You must be ingesting some kind of illicit hallucinogen.

[Lord_Baltar]

Does Bush actually read these things his Administration is throwing out there?

If he thinks a move to get rid of Overtime pay is a good idea, I'd sure like to hear the Bots explain that one away.

[John Beresford Tipton]

"I'd sure like to hear the Bots explain that one away."

I'm sure they will be here shortly,
just as soon as they can drink enough Bush Kool Aid.

Though even they must feel that it is taking more and more Kool Aid lately.

[Once-Ler]

Why should any Bushbot have to defend the failure of Sens. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska - Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Ted Stevens of Alaska.

Plus this is not the final vote. Let's just see what the conference comes back with.

My understanding is that this overtime pay applies mainly to union and government workers and I will be very happy to pay less taxes for government workers, and overpriced government contracted union workers. I will also be happy to see less union dues going to 'rat candidates. This fact that this is a good bill is bolstered by the AFL/CIO and RINO opposition.

The Kool-aid is fine, in fact, it is Cherry.

[Nov3]

A federal law, mandating overtime pay is unconstitutional without a corresponding tax on all citizens to compensate private property owners for the loss of their private property for public use.

What are you smoking? Some good tahitian dope?

[John Beresford Tipton]

"My understanding is that this overtime pay applies mainly to "union and government workers"

"union and government workers" are covered by collective bargaining agreements which spell out the overtime rate to be paid. Therefore this bill has no effect on their overtime.

However, because it will effect those workers who are *NOT* union members it will become a potent union organizing tool, increasing union membership and the dues collected and put into political campaigns for Democratic candidates.

Enjoy your Kool Aid

[meyer]

I expected it, and I'm not upset - the plan was percieved as a pay cut by many people and for good reason. Giving up time-and-a-half overtime for "voluntary" straight-time compensation isn't a 1:1 deal. Now, one may not agree with overtime compensation in general (I don't get OT anymore), but if your employer "asked" you to work 50 hours this week and take 10 off next week instead of taking the time-and-a-half for the 10 hours this week, would you take it?

[PackerBoy]

I am not in favor of the sweeping changes this law brings, but it would allow some additional people to qualify for overtime who did not before, and it allows for some fleibility that current laws do not. On balance, many working families would probably lose out on overtime that is currently being paid. Then again, this new law might help save some jobs from leaving the country by reducing labor costs.

[PackerBoy]

You make a very good point. Many employees would prefer compensatory time (future time off) to pvertime pay, and employers would save labor costs. Now THAT is a win-win situation that few would argue against.

[meyer]

You make a very good point. Many employees would prefer compensatory time (future time off) to pvertime pay, and employers would save labor costs. Now THAT is a win-win situation that few would argue against.

There's two things wrong with the proposal in its present form - one, compensation time was to be paid at a 1:1 rate while OT was to be paid at 1.5:1 rate. So, it would be in a company's best interest to prefer employees that would work for the cheaper comp time, while many employees would prefer the extra money.

The other problem is that it changes the requirements of being "management" to someone who leads a smaller crew. I beleive that the number is 3. This would make most working foremen management and would put them in the envious position of not being compensated for their efforts.

[Mini-14]

those cash balance pension deals are a total ripoff, the $$$s saved are instantly placed into the executive compensation basket, or the funds used to setup merger and acquisitions with the investment bankers and lawyers feeding at the trough, while retirees go without. It also forces older people to stay on the job longer, reducing opportunity for their jobs to be taken by younger workers when they retire.

I received the benefit of a cash balance plan at a company that I joined a year and a half ago. This is in addition to a 401K plan. I hardly consider the cash balance plan a ripoff. In fact, I consider it a BENEFIT. Let me repeat it again, my cash balance plan is a BENEFIT

[oceanview]

for people with traditional part A company pensions, who have many years on the job, the cash balance destroys their retirement hopes. for those folks, its a ripoff. they should be allowed to retire under the old rules. for new employees who have no accumulated years of service under the old plan, the company can do whatever it wants. in reality, part A pensions will soon be a thing of the past in the US, so it really doesn't matter.

[Once-Ler]

From U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Division of Labor Force Statistics

---

In 2002, 13.2 percent of wage and salary workers were union members, down
from 13.4 percent (as revised) in 2001, the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau
of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of persons belonging to a
union fell by 280,000 over the year to 16.1 million in 2002. The union mem-
bership rate has steadily declined from a high of 20.1 percent in 1983, the
first year for which comparable union data are available.

---

So you think cuts in union overtime pay are gonna ignite worker rage? Right. If I'm drinking Kool-Aid you're drunk out of your mind.

[DLfromthedesert]

What do you have against flexibility? This change would not MANDATE comp time, just ALLOW it. Some people would welcome the extra time to spend with their families.