Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Working class" people (with incomes below $50k/year) voted for Clinton.
All of them?
The smart ones, at least.
Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
71–80 of 98 posts
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#72I 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 don't think your stance is unreasonable. Far from it. However, as a worker, I prefer to get paid a lump sum per month as long as I am free to manage my time. I work extra when I want to work extra (which usually coincides with my employer needing some extra help). When I need time off, I take it.
Normally I work more than I get paid for. Sometimes disaster strikes, or illness, or once in a lifetime opportunities. I want my employer to respect what I do and give me the opportunity to take the time that I need.
I freely give them my time. They freely give me my space.
I've worked in places where they track every second. You have a certain number of sick days and god help you if you need more. Punch in. Punch out. Emergencies happen and I'm off to my manager to sign off my overtime slip before I'll even think about stemming the flow of money resulting from downtime. I could go on for a long time, but you get the point.
I don't like working for places that act that way. And while I understand the necessity to protect those that must work in such terrible conditions, I don't want to give up the way I like to live: where we both freely give each other what we need.
One quick final comment. I don't leave this to chance. I tell my employers pretty clearly that this is how I like to live. If they can't accommodate me, it's usually a sign for me to start looking elsewhere to work. Not everybody has that luxury, but I think it is the ideal they should strive for rather than what people usually ask for (overtime pay).
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that would be a strawman argument. Whatever legal principles are at stake here do not rise to a repudiation of law itself.
Well, I perceive that SubiculumCode is among other things arguing that this legal procedural issue, and the possibility that the administrative rule making did not follow the law, something we ought to accept as legit given that Obama nominated the judge and the hurdle to get a preliminary injunction is very high, as Sacho abily discusses in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13028904 , " is shit ". I certainly cou…
Even if they were suggesting that the legal process in question was flawed, that would also not be equivalent to repudiating the rule of law. You may have an axe to grind on that topic, and I am sure that it's a wonderful rejoinder to a wide variety of political dissent. It is a strawman argument however you slice it. If questioning legal processes amounted to an attack on law, then all lawyers would be anarchists, and Congress would be...a pathology, perhaps. So far, there are few issues before the American public in which anyone is claimed or claiming to be above the rule of law, and it has precisely nothing to do with this case.
The more charitable interpretation of SubiculumCode's words, and the one that does not need to assume facts not in evidence, would be that "This is shit" should be taken to mean, "This is terrible news". Which would either way be a normal human reaction, and a valid opinion, despite your attempts to portray otherwise.
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I can understand it for higher earners What's the cutoff that determines when someone is classified as a higher earner?
There should be no cutoff. it's either paid for all (as it should be) or for none. How can you say that some people have less rights because they earn more?
I think another consideration is higher earning jobs typically have more of a gray area around what constitutes work. E.g. It's clear that a cashier isn't working anymore when they clock out. But as a developer, I certainly have times when I come up with an idea at home and start working on it, an idea in the shower, etc.
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#75I 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 don't think your stance is unreasonable. Far from it. However, as a worker, I prefer to get paid a lump sum per month as long as I am free to manage my time. I work extra when I want to work extra (which usually coincides with my employer needing some extra help). When I need time off, I take it. Normally I work more than I get paid for. Sometimes disaster strikes, or illness, or once in a lifetime opportunities. I…
You can't optimize for the best interpretation and faithful adherence to the law. Just because some drivers could actually drive safely at night with their lights off doesn't make that an ok thing for everybody to do.
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#76I 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.
In my country / province (Canada / Alberta), IT workers are considered professionals and as such we are overtime exempt while we in no way qualify as "high earners" compared to a lot of the surrounding vocations - is that the same where you are, or are we just getting a raw deal up here?
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I perceive that SubiculumCode is among other things arguing that this legal procedural issue, and the possibility that the administrative rule making did not follow the law, something we ought to accept as legit given that Obama nominated the judge and the hurdle to get a preliminary injunction is very high, as Sacho abily discusses in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13028904 , " is shit ". I certainly cou…
Even if they were suggesting that the legal process in question was flawed, that would also not be equivalent to repudiating the rule of law. You may have an axe to grind on that topic, and I am sure that it's a wonderful rejoinder to a wide variety of political dissent. It is a strawman argument however you slice it. If questioning legal processes amounted to an attack on law, then all lawyers would be anarchists, a…
Indeed it is terrible news: Poverty is rough.
To be precise, the law and regulations were appropriate decades ago, when it protected workers, but in its current form, oppressed them into long underpaid, non-livable, labor. In my view, the Obama administration change in regulation, now blocked, was restoring the original effects and outcomes of those laws and regulations, and probably as originally intended by those whom passed it.
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that would be a strawman argument. Whatever legal principles are at stake here do not rise to a repudiation of law itself.
Well, I perceive that SubiculumCode is among other things arguing that this legal procedural issue, and the possibility that the administrative rule making did not follow the law, something we ought to accept as legit given that Obama nominated the judge and the hurdle to get a preliminary injunction is very high, as Sacho abily discusses in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13028904 , " is shit ". I certainly cou…
I certainly was not arguing that. I mean that the judge fucked Christmas up for a bunch of poor folk by blocking a well deserved change in regulation that no longer served its original intent in protecting laborers.
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I perceive that SubiculumCode is among other things arguing that this legal procedural issue, and the possibility that the administrative rule making did not follow the law, something we ought to accept as legit given that Obama nominated the judge and the hurdle to get a preliminary injunction is very high, as Sacho abily discusses in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13028904 , " is shit ". I certainly cou…
I certainly was not arguing that. I mean that the judge fucked Christmas up for a bunch of poor folk by blocking a well deserved change in regulation that no longer served its original intent in protecting laborers.
I mean that the judge fucked Christmas up for a bunch of poor folk by blocking a well deserved change in regulation that no longer served its original intent in protecting laborers.
All I can say is that I'm now quite certain I wasn't misreading the narrow part of the intent of your words that I initially commented on.
Re: Judge blocks Obama overtime rule, putting it in jeopardy
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not the role of the judiciary to define what is just of unjust: they just need to make a ruling based on the law. There is really no difference if someone is paid $20k or $90k: you always must discount that rate if you are not an hourly employee. It is not theft: it is at-will employment and nobody is being forced to take it. Also, the ruling is only being postponed: --- “Due to the approaching effective date o…
> It is not theft: it is at-will employment and nobody is being forced to take it. That's a strange view of how the world works. But of course if one has never been forced to take a shitty job because they just have no options, one can hold such a view more easily.
I don't think it's very charitable to imply that the parent only holds their opinion due to their assumed economic status.