20 million Trump voters’ will lose time and half overtime pay under GOP pla

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

Looks like 20 million voters of Trump got trumped. 60 million if you wanna include all of those who voted for him 

[bliaz 897]

 

[bblough 312]

14 minutes ago, Goosey said:

The company this man heads, Targetsmart Communications LLC, was a paid member of Hillary's campaign.

#ThingsThatMakeYouGoHmm

 

 

Anyways, it's not certain that the Republicans will reverse this, at least not in the near future.

 

 

 

who is 'this man' ?

[Morphine Prince 109,655]

Let's hope  

[Born Brave 2,072]

To be honest this is not true. 

Hourly workers are always to be paid overtime. It's been that way since before even the Obama regulations. Why do I know this? Because I was making overtime while George W. Bush was in office. 

The only thing I see here is that "salary" employees could lose overtime wages. I think Obama basically said "if you make $47,000 or less, you deserve overtime regardless if you're salary based or hourly based".

This doesn't actually make sense at all. I don't buy it. 

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

I would have been effected by this and our CEO was going to raise all of our salaries beneath this threshold, above it. However, I see how it can be problematic. Jumping from 24K to 47K is huge, perhaps an incremental movement of 2-3 years would've been best. It allows employers to budget this into costs. We work for several clients, so it would've heavily impacted our existing contracts budgets agreed to prior to the executive order. 

I'm definitely sad I'm not getting that raise, but in these cases getting a raise is not always a good thing when your employer hasn't had enough time to budget for it. It could lead to getting let go...

I don't want to see this go away. If the GOP is smart they'll keep it but maybe go from 24K to 35K to 41K to 47K over 3 years. I think it's absurd that people only making 24K (or 30K for that matter) do not qualify for OT. I've made those low salaries before and it's a total loophole for employers to lowball a salary to avoid OT, rather than put you at 12-15 dollars an hour (which you'd then apply for OT as hourly). 

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

22 minutes ago, Justinn said:

To be honest this is not true. 

Hourly workers are always to be paid overtime. It's been that way since before even the Obama regulations. Why do I know this? Because I was making overtime while George W. Bush was in office. 

The only thing I see here is that "salary" employees could lose overtime wages. I think Obama basically said "if you make $47,000 or less, you deserve overtime regardless if you're salary based or hourly based".

This doesn't actually make sense at all. I don't buy it. 

Essentially, if you make $25K a year, which is about $12/hr, you will not get OT because you're salaried. What Obama passed was an attempt to allow anyone making a salary under $47K a year to be eligible for overtime work. It's a huge jump and should have been put into effect incrementally over a period of time much like most new minimum wages. 

That being said, as someone who started his career making $25K a year, people making these lower salaries deserve OT time when they work longer than 40 hour weeks. That takes the $12/hr and lowers it depending how many extra hours they put in (I easily had to put in 45 many times). Someone making $25K a year who works 45 hours one or more weeks is now lowered to $10/hr pay, which is below some states minimum wage threshold. It's a loophole for employers to offer low salaried work with the expectation that someone making $25K a year or 30K a year put in as much time as someone making $75K a year with no additional pay. You'll see lots of employers offering the lower salary rather than offering higher rater hourly pay for this reason. It's a loophole that need to be shut down, but I think Obama was moving a little to quickly and ambitiously. Employers do need time to budget OT or higher salaries into their contracts and yearly budgets.

Like I said, this should be an incremental change. Year one it raises to $35K, year two to $41K, and year three up to the $47K. 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

3 hours ago, koonsisme said:

Essentially, if you make $25K a year, which is about $12/hr, you will not get OT because you're salaried. What Obama passed was an attempt to allow anyone making a salary under $47K a year to be eligible for overtime work. It's a huge jump and should have been put into effect incrementally over a period of time much like most new minimum wages. 

That being said, as someone who started his career making $25K a year, people making these lower salaries deserve OT time when they work longer than 40 hour weeks. That takes the $12/hr and lowers it depending how many extra hours they put in (I easily had to put in 45 many times). Someone making $25K a year who works 45 hours one or more weeks is now lowered to $10/hr pay, which is below some states minimum wage threshold. It's a loophole for employers to offer low salaried work with the expectation that someone making $25K a year or 30K a year put in as much time as someone making $75K a year with no additional pay. You'll see lots of employers offering the lower salary rather than offering higher rater hourly pay for this reason. It's a loophole that need to be shut down, but I think Obama was moving a little to quickly and ambitiously. Employers do need time to budget OT or higher salaries into their contracts and yearly budgets.

Like I said, this should be an incremental change. Year one it raises to $35K, year two to $41K, and year three up to the $47K. 

What a nuanced post, I'm shook  

[Manul 7,377]

xoxo, Karma 

[The Fame Joanne 5,985]

12 hours ago, modern ecstasy said:

This literally makes no sense 

It does tbh. Why would born-rich-billionaire Trump give two fücks about the working class? Those regulations probably always have been a pain in the ass for him 

But the people who voted for him deserve it. How could they be stupid enough to think he would care for them? 

[GagaMyBlood95 9,915]

lol do they feel good now?