Executive order - overtime pay - Page 2
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
Like Tree11Likes

Thread: Executive order - overtime pay

  1. #11
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    Because this is not at all the purpose of executive order at all. That is more like a dictatorship. He might have less EO, but they are far too reaching.
    What are you basing this on. Have you studied up on the thousands of executive orders that have come before Obama?

    Can you make an actual case for this...in a sound argument. Or are you just saying this without actually knowing how he compares?

  2. #12
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post
    What are you basing this on. Have you studied up on the thousands of executive orders that have come before Obama?

    Can you make an actual case for this...in a sound argument. Or are you just saying this without actually knowing how he compares?
    It does not matter how he compares to past Presidents. I believe that the Executive Orders that he has been doing are not in the Countries best interest. There are many reasons I think that Pres. Obama is a poor president, not just this.

    ~Bonita~

  3. #13
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,115

    Default

    [quote]
    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    It does not matter how he compares to past Presidents.
    Sure it does. this issue is a contributing factor to why you think he is the worse president ever (why else would that have been the one and only comment you would leave in your first post on the issue.

    And when i asked you to elaborate you stated that this is "too far reaching" and not what executive orders are supposed to be for.

    So i would only imagine that means you have the knowledge to explain to me how other presidents did not do this.
    mommydearest likes this.
    Emma 08/31/01
    Aodhan 07/24/03
    Lillian 03/04/05
    Nathalie 07/01/07
    Cecilia Marie 1/10/10


    Photo By Anne Schmidt Photography

  4. #14
    Super Poster
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jeddah
    Posts
    678

    Default

    I am all for people getting paid what they work for. I feel it would be disheartening to those outside the thresh hold though. $455 a week is not a lot of salary, particularly when you're trying to raise a family with it. It seems though it'd be more worthwhile not to climb the ranks and just work more in lower rank....you'd earn more with likely similar hours as the paygrade ahead or so. It's kind of demoralizing to those who get promoted. Who wants just a title, with that much more responsibility when there is no extra compensation. At the end of the day, the paychecks will be what people see and care about because that's what's going to feed their family or not. I hope I've worded this right. I think there will be quite a lot of resentment among workers.

    So I am for people getting what they work for, no doubt. But I don't think in this said scenario it's very good...at all.
    Aisha

  5. #15
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,533

    Default

    [QUOTE=KimPossible;9118247]

    Sure it does. this issue is a contributing factor to why you think he is the worse president ever (why else would that have been the one and only comment you would leave in your first post on the issue.

    And when i asked you to elaborate you stated that this is "too far reaching" and not what executive orders are supposed to be for.

    So i would only imagine that means you have the knowledge to explain to me how other presidents did not do this.
    It is in this situation more about how I think forcing companies to pay over time to salary workers is a horrible idea than it was done by EO, however the fact that it was done by EO just adds to the situation. There are many, many things that contribute to why I think Pres. Obama is a poor president. This is just a drop in an already full bucket.

    ~Bonita~

  6. #16
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    7,261

    Default

    [QUOTE=AlyssaEimers;9118258]
    Quote Originally Posted by KimPossible View Post

    It is in this situation more about how I think forcing companies to pay over time to salary workers is a horrible idea than it was done by EO, however the fact that it was done by EO just adds to the situation. There are many, many things that contribute to why I think Pres. Obama is a poor president. This is just a drop in an already full bucket.
    But it's fine for employers to pay shift leads a flat $445 a week and call them "salaried" so they end up making less per hour than those they are supervising?

  7. #17
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,533

    Default

    To be completely honest, when I first posted this article I missed the $445 per week cap and was thinking it applied to all salaried workers. Even still after I realised I mis read the article, I still think it is a bad policy. While I disagree with someone paying someone for 40 hours a week and making them work 80 hours a week, I do not believe this kind of a rule is the answer. I would have to go back and research more how it works.

    That does not change how I feel about Pres. Obama, but I think that you would find the vast majority of Republicans my age would feel the same way. An interesting read (Not related to the debate, but I found it very interesting) on how the different presidents compair in Gallop polls to each other. I was very surprised by some of them. Presidential Job Approval Center

    ~Bonita~

  8. #18
    Mega Poster mom3girls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,440

    Default

    I read an article about raising the minimum wage recently. Bill Gates was cautioning our leaders that making wages to high will lead to employers automating or using substitutions instead of workers. I dont believe that salaried employees should be paid overtime. There may need to be adjustments in what is considered salaried or not. I personally love being a salaried employee. Most weeks I do put in more hours then what I am contracted, but on occasion I do cut out early and no one says a thing

    Here is the article
    Bill Gates: Raising Minimum Wage 'Does Cause Job Destruction' | CNS News
    AlyssaEimers likes this.
    Lisa
    Molly, Morgan, Mia and Carson

  9. #19
    Super Poster
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jeddah
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mom3girls View Post
    I read an article about raising the minimum wage recently. Bill Gates was cautioning our leaders that making wages to high will lead to employers automating or using substitutions instead of workers. I dont believe that salaried employees should be paid overtime. There may need to be adjustments in what is considered salaried or not. I personally love being a salaried employee. Most weeks I do put in more hours then what I am contracted, but on occasion I do cut out early and no one says a thing

    Here is the article
    Bill Gates: Raising Minimum Wage 'Does Cause Job Destruction' | CNS News
    WOW how interesting considering that Bill Gates wants unlimited visas for workers to come from abroad....which is chopping salaries by a third. Is he really interested in our job destruction? And if it's destructed where shall the jobs go, to outside people who are willing to work hard with much less pay and complications like rights and all.
    Aisha

  10. #20
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    23,461

    Default

    I think it's sound and it protects workers who need the protection. There will be some cases where the numbers are juggled and it's unfair, but in the majority of cases, it will help those who have no protection and are being exploited.

    I'm not an economist; I can't tell you the exact salary cap that will work. But these are low income people who are being pushed to work hours far beyond what is reasonable for their pay; if it breaks a company to pay a decent wage then they shouldn't be in business, because they can't afford it. You don't get to run a business by breaking the backs of your employees. There are creative ways to avoid paying overtime if it's that big of a deal, like having your salaried worker go home and adding someone else on an hourly basis to make up the time.
    mommydearest likes this.
    Laurie, mom to:
    Nathaniel ( 10 ) and Juliet ( 7 )




    Baking Adventures In A Messy Kitchen (blog)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions