POTUS 45.08: Suckers

[bronconick]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

You are right.

But after 6 years of almost complete lack of real bi-partisanship, isn't it odd that they were able to put a 5 month budget together that had *that* much compromise in it? To the point that it bothered don a LOT. And then we had Melissa McCarthy tell us that this budget should be highlighted in it's bipartisan nature.

It's that part that makes this whole situation odd.

It's almost as if they know something.

They completely disregarded Trump's budget. Some of it could be that no one in Trump's administration has any idea how to work on Capitol Hill, and the rest being that it gutted everything not in the military or Homeland Security. It was basically a WWII budget.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Here is the problem with your conditions -- Employees never get to absolutely decide when they are taking paid time off, whether it is paid time off earned or granted as part of their regular work, or this "comp time." When an employee takes his or her vacation time or paid time off is always subject to final approval by the employer, otherwise an employer could find itself with no employees say during the week between Christmas and New Years.

It is funny that Warren and others are coming out against this, given the fact that they personally can have their public employee staff members take comp time. The statutory prohibition on comp time doesn't apply to public employers.

I will tell you that every single employee that I have begs me to permit them to take comp time. Every one. I think there is an exception in the law that allows comp time for private sector employers if the comp time is taken during the same payroll period, but my employees just really want to bank it and save it for later in the year. I'm friends with the HR director of the City where I live and she told me once that in her years in that position (approximately 12), she's had maybe five instances where an employee has chosen overtime pay over comp time.

And that is fine, but should it not still be up to the worker what they choose? Just because the majority will choose one doesnt mean we should mandate it for all.

 

[jerphisch]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Here is the problem with your conditions -- Employees never get to absolutely decide when they are taking paid time off, whether it is paid time off earned or granted as part of their regular work, or this "comp time." When an employee takes his or her vacation time or paid time off is always subject to final approval by the employer, otherwise an employer could find itself with no employees say during the week between Christmas and New Years.

It is funny that Warren and others are coming out against this, given the fact that they personally can have their public employee staff members take comp time. The statutory prohibition on comp time doesn't apply to public employers.

I will tell you that every single employee that I have begs me to permit them to take comp time. Every one. I think there is an exception in the law that allows comp time for private sector employers if the comp time is taken during the same payroll period, but my employees just really want to bank it and save it for later in the year. I'm friends with the HR director of the City where I live and she told me once that in her years in that position (approximately 12), she's had maybe five instances where an employee has chosen overtime pay over comp time.

It all depends on your situation, I've worked where comp time was offered but OT pay was not. I'd have much rather had the freedom to choose, there were plenty of time I'd have rather had the money. You make me put in a 70 hour week, show me the money. Have me come in on a Saturday at the end of a pay period, I'll take an extra day off in the next one.

 

[alfablue]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

They completely disregarded Trump's budget. Some of it could be that no one in Trump's administration has any idea how to work on Capitol Hill, and the rest being that it gutted everything not in the military or Homeland Security. It was basically a WWII budget.

Could be as simple as that, but given how congress has started, including using don, this situation is just really odd.

It was odd if it happened during Obama, to me, this is 10x more odd.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Could be as simple as that, but given how congress has started, including using don, this situation is just really odd.

It was odd if it happened during Obama, to me, this is 10x more odd.

I can't simply call it odd that they're ignoring Trump's budget. It's a party that's signaling a quiet revolt against their White House. The Republican party may not be on the same page as the majority of Americans, but they are politically savvy. They understand that other nations are viewing him as someone to simply be humored. They know that he hasn't even tried to fill the vast majority of the political vacancies he needs to appoint. It's like they're reading the tea leaves, and finally realize that this man will implode within the next year or two, even if nothing ever comes of the Russia connections.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

And that is fine, but should it not still be up to the worker what they choose? Just because the majority will choose one doesnt mean we should mandate it for all.

Well, as I read the bill as proposed by those evil Republicans, it requires that before comp time can be substituted, it must be agreed upon by both the employer and the employee, either in a union contract or in another agreement made ahead of time, and furthermore, before the comp time is used the employee can change his or her mind and asked to be paid the OT pay.

 

[aparch]

It all depends on your situation, I've worked where comp time was offered but OT pay was not. I'd have much rather had the freedom to choose, there were plenty of time I'd have rather had the money. You make me put in a 70 hour week, show me the money. Have me come in on a Saturday at the end of a pay period, I'll take an extra day off in the next one.

The problem I see is that employers place paid time off into an escrow account to make the cash payout of PTO available (relatively) immediately in case the employee leaves or is fired and gets paid out for PTO banked up.

Most of these same employers have a yearly "use it or lose it" to the PTO benefits, and if an employee doesn't use their PTO time, the employer can take that money back.

Personally, my company's PTO rollover date is March 31st. As of last December 1st, I had almost 148 hours banked up, needing to be at 40 hours by March 31st. I took a week off over Christmas/New Years, another week mid January, and another four days between February and March.

This was on top of the six days I took off throughout the year last year (but, never was able to deduct PTO because I worked over 40 hours in the weeks I took a day off).

So even by taking time off throughout the year, I wasn't able to use my PTO until after the new year.

Now, I worked 350 hours of OT last year. If my employer told me they were going to pay me as PTO, that's 43.75 days. Or almost two full months vacation.

That I wouldn't be able to take. Combined with my 16 days of PTO that I earn already for the year.

So my employer can then take my unused PTO and put it in their pocket.

No thank you. Give me my *@^$*@ing check.

 

[aparch]

Well, as I read the bill as proposed by those evil Republicans, it requires that before comp time can be substituted, it must be agreed upon by both the employer and the employee, either in a union contract or in another agreement made ahead of time, and furthermore, before the comp time is used the employee can change his or her mind and asked to be paid the OT pay.

This.... makes a lot more sense.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Then that is not a big deal. Though you may want to save your "evil Republican Snark" for a day when they arent proposing Health Care legislation that will screw over millions and could raise the premiums on women who get sexually assaulted.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

The problem I see is that employers place paid time off into an escrow account to make the cash payout of PTO available (relatively) immediately in case the employee leaves or is fired and gets paid out for PTO banked up.

Most of these same employers have a yearly "use it or lose it" to the PTO benefits, and if an employee doesn't use their PTO time, the employer can take that money back.

Personally, my company's PTO rollover date is March 31st. As of last December 1st, I had almost 148 hours banked up, needing to be at 40 hours by March 31st. I took a week off over Christmas/New Years, another week mid January, and another four days between February and March.

This was on top of the six days I took off throughout the year last year (but, never was able to deduct PTO because I worked over 40 hours in the weeks I took a day off).

So even by taking time off throughout the year, I wasn't able to use my PTO until after the new year.

Now, I worked 350 hours of OT last year. If my employer told me they were going to pay me as PTO, that's 43.75 days. Or almost two full months vacation.

That I wouldn't be able to take. Combined with my 16 days of PTO that I earn already for the year.

So my employer can then take my unused PTO and put it in their pocket.

No thank you. Give me my *@^$*@ing check.

Read the bill I linked to. They can't do any of that.

 

[alfablue]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

I can't simply call it odd that they're ignoring Trump's budget. It's a party that's signaling a quiet revolt against their White House. The Republican party may not be on the same page as the majority of Americans, but they are politically savvy. They understand that other nations are viewing him as someone to simply be humored. They know that he hasn't even tried to fill the vast majority of the political vacancies he needs to appoint. It's like they're reading the tea leaves, and finally realize that this man will implode within the next year or two, even if nothing ever comes of the Russia connections.

After 8 years of battling with Obama, they turn on their own so fast?

That doesn't strike you as odd?

This isn't just turning on their own president, this is actually working with Democrats, which the total lack of doing *that* won them everything.

that seems odd to me.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

After 8 years of battling with Obama, they turn on their own so fast?

That doesn't strike you as odd?

This isn't just turning on their own president, this is actually working with Democrats, which the total lack of doing *that* won them everything.

that seems odd to me.

Since this time last year, what part of presidential politics hasn't seemed odd? If things had been progressing smoothly, that's what would have seemed odd or wrong at this point.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Another Day...Another Allegation

 

[St. Clown]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Another Day...Another Allegation

What are the odds that we learn the Trump's own a pig farm, but don't have much expense for feeding the pigs. Instead of burying the bodies of their victims...

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

After 8 years of battling with Obama, they turn on their own so fast?

That doesn't strike you as odd?

This isn't just turning on their own president, this is actually working with Democrats, which the total lack of doing *that* won them everything.

that seems odd to me.

It's not odd at all. With populism rising, the globalists' hand is being forced. If you had been truly paying attention in 2009 and 2011, you would have seen this.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

I've thought for quite some time that if Trump has any nefarious involvement with Russians, it's with the mafia. Western financial institutions are not stupid enough to do much business with him anymore.

It's been pointed out already, but Watergate took over 2 years to fully unravel, and that was a relatively minor scandal compared to what this might be. Hopefully, Congress can keep us out of any further wars for the duration.

 

[trixR4kids]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Here is the problem with your conditions -- Employees never get to absolutely decide when they are taking paid time off, whether it is paid time off earned or granted as part of their regular work, or this "comp time." When an employee takes his or her vacation time or paid time off is always subject to final approval by the employer, otherwise an employer could find itself with no employees say during the week between Christmas and New Years.

It is funny that Warren and others are coming out against this, given the fact that they personally can have their public employee staff members take comp time. The statutory prohibition on comp time doesn't apply to public employers.

I will tell you that every single employee that I have begs me to permit them to take comp time. Every one. I think there is an exception in the law that allows comp time for private sector employers if the comp time is taken during the same payroll period, but my employees just really want to bank it and save it for later in the year. I'm friends with the HR director of the City where I live and she told me once that in her years in that position (approximately 12), she's had maybe five instances where an employee has chosen overtime pay over comp time.

Well my particular situation is we have a really busy peak season with mandatory and even optional OT. 56 hour weeks mandatory isn't abnormal (and you can choose to do non-mandatory on top of it which... lol) If I somehow wasn't getting paid time and a half for the OT it'd be pretty miserable especially if it just got replaced with PTO that you can only use at their discretion. Assuming I'm understanding this correctly that'd be terrible, especially considering I make under 50K and that's the whole reason the Obama law was made.

Most of these same employers have a yearly "use it or lose it" to the PTO benefits, and if an employee doesn't use their PTO time, the employer can take that money back.

Also this, our peak season is right before the new year.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

I'd have much rather had the freedom to choose, there were plenty of time I'd have rather had the money. You make me put in a 70 hour week, show me the money. Have me come in on a Saturday at the end of a pay period, I'll take an extra day off in the next one.

Bingo! Perfectly described how I feel.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Well my particular situation is we have a really busy peak season with mandatory and even optional OT. 56 hour weeks mandatory isn't abnormal (and you can choose to do non-mandatory on top of it which... lol) If I somehow wasn't getting paid time and a half for the OT it'd be pretty miserable especially if it just got replaced with PTO that you can only use at their discretion. Assuming I'm understanding this correctly that'd be terrible, especially considering I make under 50K and that's the whole reason the Obama law was made.

Also this, our peak season is right before the new year.

Then that, along with SJHovey's comments, sounds like it's something you should discuss with either your employer or steward of a collective bargaining agreement, as opposed to forcing everyone else into your situation. I wouldn't be surprised if the legislation you're trying to maintain has clauses surrounding unions and their agreements. After all, who was one of the biggest opponents of $15/hr in places in California, and actually lobbied for exemptions?

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.08: Suckers

Well my particular situation is we have a really busy peak season with mandatory and even optional OT. 56 hour weeks mandatory isn't abnormal (and you can choose to do non-mandatory on top of it which... lol) If I somehow wasn't getting paid time and a half for the OT it'd be pretty miserable especially if it just got replaced with PTO that you can only use at their discretion. Assuming I'm understanding this correctly that'd be terrible, especially considering I make under 50K and that's the whole reason the Obama law was made.

Also this, our peak season is right before the new year.

There is nothing in the proposed law that requires you to take comp time instead of being paid time and a half for your work. In fact, the law would even allow you to elect to take comp time, then if you change your mind after you make that election but before you actually use the comp time, you can and you'll get your time and a half money then.