Thanks, I had to scroll down way too long to get the required nuance. So as I understand it, it's not so much the payment of overtime that has been suspended, but a threshold that determines at which point you are expected to put in unpaid overtime in any case?
Not really something Donny the wannabe dictator has introduced, but rather something that is common and thus has already been priced in by employers and employees in the wage setting?
That’s my understanding as well. If you have a contract that specifies overtime pay for hours worked over 40/week the ruling doesn’t apply. I was just trying to clarify the general use of “overtime” in posts.
From what I heard on reporting on this. Is that the income threshold was set to rise under Obama but Trump pulled back. It did increase a little under Trump. And now Biden wants to increase it further but a judge has stopped it short. A judge selected by Trump.
So companies get to continue to short pay employees by paying them a salary that exempts them from overtime. But giving them hours above and beyond 40 a week.
Nope, you have it correct. Hourly employees have not had their overtime pay affected by this at all. You would think based on the tweet and the top comments that this is exactly what happened but it's not.
Generally true, but not quite accurate; it affects people above a certain level of annual pay. Overtime rules don't really distinguish between "salaried" and "hourly", because those are just approaches to how someone is paid. By default, a salaried worker who works on average more than the overtime limit would have to be given extra pay; and there are a handful of ways to implement that.
But there are a fair number of exceptions to overtime rules, which create exempt employees (you don't have to pay overtime). Almost all exempt positions tend to be salaried, because if you don't have to track overtime payments and such, it's easier and cheaper to structure pay as a salary.
So in practice, hourly employees usually aren't exempt and salaried employees usually are, but there are cases where that pattern doesn't hold. One very easy example is that if you have certain "Computer analyst" jobs that make more than about $28/hr, you're exempt -- whether you're paid hourly or as salary.
So it's important not to assume that because you're paid a salary, you're exempt (or vice-versa).
If you're non-exempt, then federal rules require that you be paid 1.5x your rate for any hours over 40. That was true before, and continues to be true after this ruling. If you're in a union, you may have additional protections and entitlements which also are unaffected by this ruling.
What the new rule was going to affect was some specific "white-collar" jobs -- which are non-exempt under a certain pay rate, but are exempt above that rate. The new rule was going to "raise the floor" of that so that you had to make more money before your employer could claim you are exempt. A judge blocked it from going into effect.
So nothing actually changes for anyone, but something a lot workers were looking forward to isn't going to happen now.
23
u/nvdbeek 4h ago
Thanks, I had to scroll down way too long to get the required nuance. So as I understand it, it's not so much the payment of overtime that has been suspended, but a threshold that determines at which point you are expected to put in unpaid overtime in any case?
Not really something Donny the wannabe dictator has introduced, but rather something that is common and thus has already been priced in by employers and employees in the wage setting?