31–40 of 56 posts
i have an applicable anecdote: .. in terse i worked 120hrs in a week, was refused overtime by splitting my duties into three 40hr positions, did research, went to the DOJ, they sat on it for 9 months, then refused and threatened me, i sent the DOJ lawyer's secretary my research, she went over his head, and i got the pay due to me .. i lost a job in nyc, at the time of employment i was 'wearing many hats' which really…
If you're going to get strict about getting paid for every hour you work, you'd better believe I, as your employer, am going to start getting strict about making sure you're really working for every minute of those hours. No goofing off, no idle chit-chat, just work.
How many of us would be willing to be held up to this standard? I sure as hell wouldn't.
> This has spread to multiple industries across many sectors. It’s affected not just minimum-wage workers, but also middle-class workers. I have no idea how much of an issue this is and what the real-world implications for the individuals are, but if it has become a systematic phenomenon, then maybe it's worth rethinking the rules? If it really is as wide-spread as they say, then having everyone play by the book migh…
This is the most plutocratic self-serving thing I've seen on HN today. You're arguing for the legalisation of wage theft on the basis that it might disrupt prices.
Yes, if you have an economy where all the growth goes to the 1% and the 99% see no change, that might be good for price stability. But why in God's name would anyone want to live like that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really - a corporation is a group of people. Sometimes those in control of it have no goal other than profit maximization, but by no means always.
I know this isn't the point you were addressing, but according to the law in the US the corporation is sometimes a person. Everyone's favourite source: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood In relation to other places, see The City of London. There is an incredible situation with corporations there where they get to vote as if they were a number of people (equal to employee numbers). It's surreal.
(Although it has "corporation" in the name it has nothing to do with limited liability companies as the usual meaning of "corporation". It's a local government that's a millenium old and predates both modern banking and company law.)
I'm left wondering how this missing overtime pay continue past the first short paycheck? I'd stop working overtime until it arrived.
Before people get too worked up about this they should consider it from the other point of view. If you're going to get strict about getting paid for every hour you work, you'd better believe I, as your employer, am going to start getting strict about making sure you're really working for every minute of those hours. No goofing off, no idle chit-chat, just work. How many of us would be willing to be held up to this s…
Second, I would much rather work 40 hours with very little chit-chat then mandatory 60 hours with 30 hours that time being wasted. I actually worked in such environment and liked it. I would note that it was team culture, not something enforced by a set of punishments.
IMO, any company that asks employees to work more than 40 hours a week and doesn't pay for those hours is doing 'wage theft'. Classifying employees as exempt seem to be a common method used by employers. It surprises me how often on HN startup employees claim to work 70-80 hours without any complaints. And, startup employers expect more hours without paying.
In the U.S., the classification of exempt vs. non-exempt employees is specified by federal law, so companies can't just make that decision on their own. Unfortunately, software developers are legally exempted from having to be paid overtime: "More specifically, the special computer employee exemption applies to workers who apply systems analysis techniques and procedures to determine hardware, software, or system fun…
i have an applicable anecdote: .. in terse i worked 120hrs in a week, was refused overtime by splitting my duties into three 40hr positions, did research, went to the DOJ, they sat on it for 9 months, then refused and threatened me, i sent the DOJ lawyer's secretary my research, she went over his head, and i got the pay due to me .. i lost a job in nyc, at the time of employment i was 'wearing many hats' which really…
> This has spread to multiple industries across many sectors. It’s affected not just minimum-wage workers, but also middle-class workers. I have no idea how much of an issue this is and what the real-world implications for the individuals are, but if it has become a systematic phenomenon, then maybe it's worth rethinking the rules? If it really is as wide-spread as they say, then having everyone play by the book migh…
might result in a redistribution of large amounts of money, thus impacting inflation .. which I guess is hardly in anyone's interest This is the most plutocratic self-serving thing I've seen on HN today. You're arguing for the legalisation of wage theft on the basis that it might disrupt prices. Yes, if you have an economy where all the growth goes to the 1% and the 99% see no change, that might be good for price sta…
No. I'm arguing that we're currently labeling something as "theft", that might not actually be theft, and that we should thus take a closer look at the issue.
> if you have an economy where all the growth goes to the 1% and the 99% see no change
Yes and no. Growth (and progress) will go to everyone - Obviously, new technologies will be available to everyone, since there'd be little point in them if the average consumer couldn't afford them. Actual money however will only to to the "1%" (or whatever other small fraction).
The idea is that since, in total, those "1%" will spend less of that money on consumables/personal-indulgences, most of this money will either be taken out of circulation (and thus damping inflation) or handled by professionals (and thus put to good use).
> But why in God's name would anyone want to live like that?
(1) Because it makes for a more easily predictable future, resulting in less headaches.
(2) Because less of the work performed by humanity as a whole will be squandered on unimportant endeavours.
Like I said, what is the alternative? Give people more money to spend on things like booze and vacation trips?