3 ms·

Businesses pay for the overtime, but not at 150% of the base rate.

jws 10y ago
This is more about which salaried employees are exempt, that is they don't get overtime. The theory is if you are pulling an oar then, you get overtime if you are hourly or yearly paid. If you are in charge of the ship then you don't have to get overtime. The problem was the law set a fixed annual income as the test for exemption and this got eroded away by inflation. The Obama rule was an attempt to restore the original intent of the law.
vidarh 10y ago
People covered by these exemptions are often not paid overtime at all, as the Fair Labor Standards Act does not require any overtime pay if you fall under the exemptions. These exemptions are meant to cover people in certain job roles where output is measured by work delivered, not hours spent, and where the person has independent responsibility for controlling their working hours to certain extent and were overtime as such is in theory voluntary. The threshold in question exists to make it harder to "define away" overtime pay obligations by pretending a role is more independent than it is, by connecting it to pay levels that makes it more likely that the role does in fact meet the intent of the law. The old/current levels makes a total mockery of that It's worth noting that this change also follows a change in 2004 that went the other way - redefining large groups of previously non-exempt lower level supervisors etc. as exempt, drastically cutting their rights to overtime pay.
- syshum 10y ago
  >>>>These exemptions are meant to cover people in certain job roles where output is measured by work delivered, not hours spent, and where the person has independent responsibility for controlling their working hours to certain extent and were overtime as such is in theory voluntary. While that is the stated reason, if you actually read the law it becomes clear that these exemptions are meant to cover people in certain job roles where the lobbyist paid congress the correct amount of money to get their preferred job roles exempted >>>>It's worth noting that this change also follows a change in 2004 that went the other way Yes and many (myself included) are wondering why the 2004 Rules in favor of business are with in the scope of DOL power, but the 2016 rules are not. Legally speaking if the 2016 rules are not valid than neither are the 2004 rules

jws 10y ago

This is more about which salaried employees are exempt, that is they don't get overtime. The theory is if you are pulling an oar then, you get overtime if you are hourly or yearly paid. If you are in charge of the ship then you don't have to get overtime. The problem was the law set a fixed annual income as the test for exemption and this got eroded away by inflation. The Obama rule was an attempt to restore the original intent of the law.

vidarh 10y ago

People covered by these exemptions are often not paid overtime at all, as the Fair Labor Standards Act does not require any overtime pay if you fall under the exemptions. These exemptions are meant to cover people in certain job roles where output is measured by work delivered, not hours spent, and where the person has independent responsibility for controlling their working hours to certain extent and were overtime as such is in theory voluntary. The threshold in question exists to make it harder to "define away" overtime pay obligations by pretending a role is more independent than it is, by connecting it to pay levels that makes it more likely that the role does in fact meet the intent of the law. The old/current levels makes a total mockery of that It's worth noting that this change also follows a change in 2004 that went the other way - redefining large groups of previously non-exempt lower level supervisors etc. as exempt, drastically cutting their rights to overtime pay.

syshum 10y ago
>>>>These exemptions are meant to cover people in certain job roles where output is measured by work delivered, not hours spent, and where the person has independent responsibility for controlling their working hours to certain extent and were overtime as such is in theory voluntary. While that is the stated reason, if you actually read the law it becomes clear that these exemptions are meant to cover people in certain job roles where the lobbyist paid congress the correct amount of money to get their preferred job roles exempted >>>>It's worth noting that this change also follows a change in 2004 that went the other way Yes and many (myself included) are wondering why the 2004 Rules in favor of business are with in the scope of DOL power, but the 2016 rules are not. Legally speaking if the 2016 rules are not valid than neither are the 2004 rules