The salary law has been temporarily blocked!

[GoodSteward]

So on Dec 1, the new salary law was supposed to be in effect, however, a judge in Texas has filed against it and stopped it for now. I was told if the law is officially reversed, all the people who were given raises to the new salary limit could get put back to where they were.

In other words, businesses will be allowed to reverse any raises given in reply to the new law.

Terrible.

To catch up anybody not aware, Obama signed a new law raising the limit for exempt from overtime status from 23k a year to almost 48k a year for Salary people. What this means is that all those workers, such as McDonald lower managers, making in the high twenties or low thirties that are working 50 hours a week now have to get paid 10 hours overtime OR be bumped up to at least 48k a year to be exempt from getting paid for OT. This hasn't gone over well with companies, obviously. Now, how can they overwork people and still keep the margins low? Poor companies.

[Outdoorsygal]

Wow I wasn't aware of this. Thanks for the info.
Not justifying it but understand why it was blocked. It will cost companies a pretty penny. They relish their slave labor

[GoodSteward]

Wow I wasn't aware of this. Thanks for the info.
Not justifying it but understand why it was blocked. It will cost companies a pretty penny. They relish their slave labor

I knew it wouldn't go over well. This is the same, but opposite side, as when a company decides to raise prices a large amount overnight. Sticker shock will cause a big shift in sales. It adjusts too much at once.

As an example, we like to go to Zaxbys restaurant. They have a chicken plate with boneless wings for 6.99-7.29 depending on the area. A month or so ago, we went to one and they had raised the price to 8.99 for the same thing. I went to several more over the next week and they were the same price. The result? I don't get that plate anymore, and we barely eat there now as a family. I don't feel the price is worth what you get since it was 2$ cheaper weeks before. You can't just raise a meal 2$ at what is basically a fast food place, and expect people to feel the value is still there. Not unless you add something cheap to it to help justify it, Or you raise it 25 cents to 50 cents at a time to get where you need to be over a long stretch of time. Perception of value must be maintained. This is why the value items are a really bad thing for restaurants. Once they can't be sold for the same price anymore, the price must go up, but people won't feel they are "worth" the price since it is seen as a value item. If they were needing to bump the price that bad, they should have started before now.

I see this law as the same thing. They should have been bumping this up every few years instead of trying to do it all at once. As big of a benefit as this raise was for me, I know most companies can't really take that kind of hit up front. It'll drop profit margins, which will drop share prices, etc. It's a bad trickle effect. They need time to work on things to make the numbers be ok. I guess the price hike at Zaxbys was in reply to the salary law? If so, we will see a lot more of that soon if the law passes as is.

[Outdoorsygal]

I knew it wouldn't go over well. This is the same, but opposite side, as when a company decides to raise prices a large amount overnight. Sticker shock will cause a big shift in sales. It adjusts too much at once.

As an example, we like to go to Zaxbys restaurant. They have a chicken plate with boneless wings for 6.99-7.29 depending on the area. A month or so ago, we went to one and they had raised the price to 8.99 for the same thing. I went to several more over the next week and they were the same price. The result? I don't get that plate anymore, and we barely eat there now as a family. I don't feel the price is worth what you get since it was 2$ cheaper weeks before. You can't just raise a meal 2$ at what is basically a fast food place, and expect people to feel the value is still there. Not unless you add something cheap to it to help justify it, Or you raise it 25 cents to 50 cents at a time to get where you need to be over a long stretch of time. Perception of value must be maintained. This is why the value items are a really bad thing for restaurants. Once they can't be sold for the same price anymore, the price must go up, but people won't feel they are "worth" the price since it is seen as a value item. If they were needing to bump the price that bad, they should have started before now.

I see this law as the same thing. They should have been bumping this up every few years instead of trying to do it all at once. As big of a benefit as this raise was for me, I know most companies can't really take that kind of hit up front. It'll drop profit margins, which will drop share prices, etc. It's a bad trickle effect. They need time to work on things to make the numbers be ok. I guess the price hike at Zaxbys was in reply to the salary law? If so, we will see a lot more of that soon if the law passes as is.

Exactly. Spot on with the bolded ^^and yes, if they do not do it in stages, the prices just shock alot of people.
So the meal they'd usually order which was much cheaper, they just don't. Increase prices in stages, people just start getting used to it.
My company is always pestering me to be a higher level supervisor. To the point of once threatening me that they'd fire me if I didn't move up.
That would require being on call. ALL THE TIME. No kidding I hear a day off is rare. I don't want clients calling me for no reason, even one call sortof ruins the hour.

I am a Supervisor now but sorta created my job. They understood I'd be in the office doing paperwork but instead I do the paperwork WHILE on the clock as a staff member (partial staff member/partial supervisor) and email it. I am sure that shocked them. Then refused to go in saying I am busy . I basically took a job description but refused to adhere to it but got all of the work done they said was not possible while on shift. Sure it is, if you have a client you click with, they will lay off and sleep as needed. SO a few hrs a night, after she is in bed, I do the paperwork for the other homes. And even check on other Clients sometimes while she is with me. She loves it. Usually I visit them before getting her though...

If I had known of this law, I probably would have accepted their last offer. No doubt they will keep trying. But luckily I didn't know about it since it was re-pealed anyhow. I would LOVE to make more money but not at the expense of my quality of life, no thank you. I have patience with the clients (they are from the mental institutions which are closing in California) but only if I have a certain amount of time off.

[greenskeeper]

good riddance to another owebama disaster via the stroke of a pen.

[GoodSteward]

The sad result is that many businesses were going to expect their employee's to do the same amount of work in 40hours instead of 45-50 hours. They will just look for more productivity, even when there isn't anymore to have.

With restaurant work, I'm not sure what they would do because they need the people there. I guess they would pay the manager more, and drop the crew down to make up for it.

[GoodSteward]

good riddance to another owebama disaster via the stroke of a pen.

While it wasn't the best way to implement the plan, an increase is needed badly. It isn't fair to pay someone a low salary, and then expect them to just keep working regardless. My dad is salary for a smaller company, and he often will work over 50 hours. Every hour he works is making his hourly wage smaller and smaller. I was hoping this would give him a well deserved increase. Oh well :/

[greenskeeper]

While it wasn't the best way to implement the plan, an increase is needed badly. /

I agree it could be increased gradually but not all at once and certainly not as high as what owebama signed into law.

[StormRichards]

They should have been bumping this up every few years instead of trying to do it all at once.

Totally agree. Not sure if they do it for all government jobs, but I have a relative that gets a cost of living increase EVERY YEAR. Yet the Government can't manage to pass any fair wage laws.

I personally have never benefited whenever minimum wage was increased. I just watched co-workers with less experience get raises and become closer to what I made. This ridiculous law that was blocked also wasn't going to affect me. But again, I have co-workers that GOT raises because of it. Yeah, I read the part where companies don't have to honor them if it is overturned, but that is not going to happen at my company. I have been told by someone in the know that the raises went through and they are keeping them that way.

[Jbone]

Obama was trying to adjust the salary pay according to inflation. The proposed jump in pay was supposed to close the gap. I agree that the pay increase should have been over several years and not all at once but I do understand what Obama was trying to do. Read this: http://www.epi.org/publication/ib381...ime-pay-rules/

My employer instead of giving salaried employees raises they would have "cut" my pay. I would have been made hourly. However my base hourly rate would have been lowered. And I'd still continue to work a 9 hour / day 45 hour work week. So I would have 5 hours of "guaranteed" overtime to equal what my base salary would have been. Great in theory but if I worked less hours any given week I would have essentially taken a pay cut. And any "extra" overtime I would be chastised and strung up. I basically was told don't expect any quarterly bonuses as well.

Overall this new salary law backfired.

[GoodSteward]

Overall this new salary law backfired.

I had a feeling it might would. I was surprised to hear the law change, surprised to get a bigger than normal pay raise this year because of it, but also surprised it was blocked at the last min by only one judge(I expected more heat and from a lot more sources).

Most businesses didn't want to pay people more, and I knew they would do whatever they had to to make it even back out avoiding any benefit it tried to bring.

In my company, the retail sector went to hourly across the board all the way up to Store managers. They get the same rate, but now they are more restricted and can NOT work past 40 unless it is approved. I figured most companies that really didn't want to do this, but had people that regularly worked 45-50 hours (like my dad) were going to go hourly and get a pay cut as well to make the overtime equal the salary.

[Nutria]

It wasn't a law.

It was a Labor Department regulation, and an Obama-appointed judged was convinced that it was an unconstitutional overreach of Executive power.