Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 98 posts

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#21

Post by grzm »

noobermin wrote: post #20
refurb wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump's not even in office and he's getting blamed already. This was a judge who made the ruling. Not Trump.

I think this entire thread is diverging from the article, but the article does quote Trump: Trump has vowed to roll back Obama regulations that he says are hurting the economy. He expressed support for changing the overtime rule during the presidential campaign. “Rolling back the overtime regulation is just one example of the many regulations that need to be addressed to do that,” Trump told Circa in August. “We woul…

Quoting blocks of text this way makes it really hard to read due to side-scrolling, particularly on mobile.

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#22

Post by Gustomaximus »

onchidiacea wrote: post #2

I don't know how businesses get away without paying overtime. My life is finite. My work hours are finite. If you want more hours out of me, you pay for them.

I can understand it for higher earners. You are well compensated, typically better conditions and have employment options should the enviroment become toxic.

For lower pays absolutely. If an employers agrees to X contracted hours/rate and then demands X+ hours because they know you cant say no, this is essentially theft. And to not pass this as rule essentially mandates it as OK. I hope this gets sorted. I suspect this judge and any future politicians/judges involved will come under a heap of scrutiny/pressure over this. It is simply too clearly unjust not to pass it. It would follow a person for the rest of their career and they would know it.

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#24

Post by kaishiro »

grzm wrote: post #21
noobermin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this entire thread is diverging from the article, but the article does quote Trump: Trump has vowed to roll back Obama regulations that he says are hurting the economy. He expressed support for changing the overtime rule during the presidential campaign. “Rolling back the overtime regulation is just one example of the many regulations that need to be addressed to do that,” Trump told Circa in August. “We woul…

Quoting blocks of text this way makes it really hard to read due to side-scrolling, particularly on mobile.

Agreed. This is completely removed from the context of the article but I primarily consume HN on mobile and I detest it when quotes are done this way. I really wish something was added to the FAQ re this.

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#25

Post by ianai »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #22
onchidiacea wrote: post #2

I don't know how businesses get away without paying overtime. My life is finite. My work hours are finite. If you want more hours out of me, you pay for them.

I can understand it for higher earners. You are well compensated, typically better conditions and have employment options should the enviroment become toxic. For lower pays absolutely. If an employers agrees to X contracted hours/rate and then demands X+ hours because they know you cant say no, this is essentially theft. And to not pass this as rule essentially mandates it as OK. I hope this gets sorted. I suspect th…

Your first sentence is the justification for paying people less than 40k year and expecting 80 hours of work out of them. It doesn't hold up.

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#26

Post by tbrownaw »

jjoonathan wrote: post #10
refurb wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. I kind of like being exempt. If I get my work done early and I decide the take the afternoon off, my paycheck is the same. That said I'm lucky and my company freely comps additional paid time off when I start working more than 40 hours per week.

People talk about "getting their work done" as if an equal amount of work were doled out every day to each worker and getting it done were a "you eat what you kill" result of being highly productive. Is this work-assignment principle common? I could see why a manager might distribute work this way, but I've never seen it actually happen -- it has always been "oh great, you finished early today, you'll have twice as m…

I have a mostly infinite to-do list, so my work is never done.

When I'm on a more well-defined project, I'll have a deadline and a set of things to do based on how fast I work and what we (me, the project manager, maybe the other developers on the project) think is reasonable.

Several co-workers usually have a single project where work is lumpy. They can have a several-day to-do list one week, and be twiddling their thumbs waiting on other people the next week.

I don't know anyone who gets a daily task list that isn't calibrated to their skill level.

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#27

Post by thinkmassive »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #22
onchidiacea wrote: post #2

I don't know how businesses get away without paying overtime. My life is finite. My work hours are finite. If you want more hours out of me, you pay for them.

I can understand it for higher earners. You are well compensated, typically better conditions and have employment options should the enviroment become toxic. For lower pays absolutely. If an employers agrees to X contracted hours/rate and then demands X+ hours because they know you cant say no, this is essentially theft. And to not pass this as rule essentially mandates it as OK. I hope this gets sorted. I suspect th…

> I can understand it for higher earners

What's the cutoff that determines when someone is classified as a higher earner?

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#28

Post by abduhl »

thinkmassive wrote: post #27
Gustomaximus wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can understand it for higher earners. You are well compensated, typically better conditions and have employment options should the enviroment become toxic. For lower pays absolutely. If an employers agrees to X contracted hours/rate and then demands X+ hours because they know you cant say no, this is essentially theft. And to not pass this as rule essentially mandates it as OK. I hope this gets sorted. I suspect th…

> I can understand it for higher earners What's the cutoff that determines when someone is classified as a higher earner?

4. The employee’s hourly rate of pay, or annual salary if paid on salaried basis, meets a minimum threshold amount set by California’s Division of Labor Statistics and Research (DLSR). For 2015, the DLSR set the amounts at $41.27 per hour or annual salary of not less than $85,981.40 for full time employment, and paid not less than $7,165.12 per month.

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#29

Post by [deleted] »

kaishiro wrote: post #24
grzm wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoting blocks of text this way makes it really hard to read due to side-scrolling, particularly on mobile.

Agreed. This is completely removed from the context of the article but I primarily consume HN on mobile and I detest it when quotes are done this way. I really wish something was added to the FAQ re this.

[deleted]

Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy

#30

Post by meddlepal »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #22
onchidiacea wrote: post #2

I don't know how businesses get away without paying overtime. My life is finite. My work hours are finite. If you want more hours out of me, you pay for them.

I can understand it for higher earners. You are well compensated, typically better conditions and have employment options should the enviroment become toxic. For lower pays absolutely. If an employers agrees to X contracted hours/rate and then demands X+ hours because they know you cant say no, this is essentially theft. And to not pass this as rule essentially mandates it as OK. I hope this gets sorted. I suspect th…

It's a federal judge. There isn't much career progression beyond that because they're appointed for life.

So, no, it won't follow them. This is also why we have lifetime appointments so judge's make legally correct rulings rather than politically appealing ones.

Post reply on HN