Close Please enter your Username and Password


jiminycricket1 74M
5533 posts
11/28/2016 8:52 am
The overtime rule


I don't support the minimum wage because I think it would mean a loss of jobs. A job, is always better than no job.

But I draw a line........

The overtime law. which is being thwarted.

"It would require companies to automatically pay salaried employees making $47,476 or less annually time-and-a-half overtime when they work more than 40 hours a week. That'd be more than double the $23,660 threshold that we currently have, and would give a raise to as many as 4 million workers."

Think about it, an employers who salaries someone for 47,476.00 dollars of less, can require that person to work more the 40 hrs, without any additional compensation.
Think about it
Think about it
Think about it
Making $47,476 dollars or less.... think about it. $47,476 or less...

This law is questionable......... this law doesn't make sense?
Are you going to allow this law not to pass?


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 9:03 am

I really want to hear the argument to not approve this law?
Come on maisie you can up with something. This is Obama's doing...

But I warn you.....you need to think about it first
You need to think about it.

My great great great grandfather had some famous words about this...

A job is better than no job. Unless that job grants the employer the right of bribery for that job, and the permission of slavery of the employee.


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 10:36 am

    Quoting Fossil_Fetcher:
    Read your own copy and paste, above. "It would require companies to automatically pay salaried employees making $47,476 or less annually time-and-a-half overtime when they work more than 40 hours a week."

    Salaried employees who make LESS than $47,476 would get overtime for work in excess of 40 hours per week. Please note that it says SALARIED employees, Jiminy. Only salaried employees who make MORE than $47,476 could be required to work more than 40 hours per week without additional compensation.

    You could have figured this one out on your own, couldn't you?

    Fossil

thank you for explaining that

You managed to get stage one right, but thought of it wrong. anyone making over $47,746 salaried, cannot be thought of as a salaried employee getting screw by the employer by making him/her salaried.

Tell me some employer paying someone a SALARY of 24,000. isn't circumventing the minimum wage, giving a salary to and hourly employee and making the employee work more for NO compensation.

So let me ask you, when you... thought about it, thought about it..

WTF were you thinking?

Sometime I assume people know shit, obviously you don't

The quote is the law Obama is trying to get passed, the courts are holding up.
The quote is the NEW law...... not the current one. So my question is why would not anyone pass it? what's the reason?


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 12:18 pm

    Quoting Fossil_Fetcher:
    Pay attention this time, Jiminy. Your imaginary employee who is salaried at $24,000 a year WILL GET OVERTIME for every hour he or she works over 40 hours. If the legislation passes or fails is a Congressional issue - not something you can fix in the blogs with your paradoxical comments. Of course I hope it passes. Why wouldn't I? All of my employees get $47,746.01 per year and I work those poor slobs into the ground.

    Do I need to get out crayons, Play Dough and Tinker Toys to explain this to you again? You explain things so poorly that you confuse yourself.

    Fossil

I just want it to pass and put into effect.

It's being stopped. Why is it being stopped?
What's the reason?

Why aren't you answer that? instead of your gobbledygook.


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 3:02 pm

    Quoting  :

don't care what it is... I never said what it is. I said it was being held up it the courts.

Why is it being held up?

Since I didn't read your blogs about it. I don't know what your reasons are?

but I can guess.. It was Obama doing, it's not a law, It's not been voted on.

I'll tell you again... i don't care about that.

What's the reason?

Why hasn't it been?


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 3:07 pm

    Quoting  :

Okay, maisie. maybe because it would hurt business?

That's a lie.....

Minimum wage hurt business. I agree.

but this is pay for hours worked, If the work doesn't produce, then don't have them do it. It a total scam, to work people without paying them at all.


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 6:59 pm

    Quoting  :

What's the matter with you?
can't you just answer the question...

Why isn't it a law? Why is it being held up?

Am I confusing you?
Tell me what you know, not what you think I don't know
Is that too difficult?.


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 7:20 pm

Okay maisie,

I'll look it up and see what the right has to say about this then I tell you what they say.


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/28/2016 7:37 pm

Remember, I'm totally against increasing the minimum wage.
Totally against it
...


jiminycricket1 74M
13732 posts
11/29/2016 6:58 am

see overtime rule 2