• wildcardology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    How is it that a third world country Ike mine pays overtime pay to all employees who work beyond the standard 8 hour work day. 25% of the hourly rate is added to the hours of overtime, plus a night differential rate if you work past 11 pm. +30% if you have to do work during a holiday.

    Not being paid for overtime work is very slavery to me.

    The reasoning of the judge is because the companies will have to pay billions in OT pay. Fuck them.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I mean this would only have applied to salaried employees earning $20/hr or less which I can’t even imagine what type of field that covers since most hourly jobs earn more than that these days.

      This is akin to the “pardoning marijuana possession convictions” thing where it didn’t apply to a single person in federal custody and only benefitted 3,000 people (with past convictions) in the entire nation.

      This is basically virtue signaling and/or table scraps for us peasants.

      • enbyecho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        25 minutes ago

        But you don’t actually know how many people this would have applied to… you just assume, right?

        Edit: It’s right in the article: “The rule would have extended to approximately four million American workers, guaranteeing them overtime pay.”

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Not sure why you would expect the federal government to be able to do anything with state charges.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          I never said I did? I said that it’s virtue signaling and performative at best rather than something that’s actually impactful on the average person’s life.

          Democrats love to talk about how much they care for the working class, but their actual actions rarely reflect that.

          • Nougat@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            3 hours ago

            So … they shouldn’t have pardoned federal cannabis possession convictions?

              • Nougat@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 hours ago

                This is akin to the “pardoning marijuana possession convictions” thing where it didn’t apply to a single person in federal custody and only benefitted 3,000 people (with past convictions) in the entire nation.

                This is basically virtue signaling and/or table scraps for us peasants.

                The only thing the federal government can do is pardon federal crimes. That is what they did. You’ve called that action “virtue signalling and/or table scraps.”

                It’s unclear whether you A) think that federal cannabis possession convictions shouldn’t have been pardoned (considering your displeasure with the fact that they were), or B) think that such convictions should have been pardoned (as they were), but also don’t like that.

                Since B) is not internally consistent - you would need to not like something you think should happen - it’s not unreasonable to ask if you think that such convictions shouldn’t be pardoned. Frankly, neither position is easy to logically square, and you’ve done nothing to assist in that endeavor.

                • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 hour ago

                  How about you learn about context and read the rest of what I wrote? My complaint with both of these actions is that they’re essentially meaningless for the majority of people and they don’t go far enough. I refer to them as table scraps and virtue signaling because they only give the appearance of taking action without actually fixing anything or improving the lives of nearly anyone. The politicians get to parade around acting like they’re working for our benefit when they’re actually doing very little to help.

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 hours ago

    it’s going back to trump’s threshold too. if you were enjoying OT with a 37K salary, congratulations, you’re exempt now

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Imagine being a salaried employee and only earning $16.80 per hour, assuming 40 hours a week. I wonder what type of work this even covers as that’s slightly above minimum wage here, and it requires you to work all those extra hours for free.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          If you’re working 60 hours a week like a lot of the salaried people I work with, that brings your hourly pay down to $11.80. I just can’t imagine why someone would take a job like that when there are so many hourly entry level jobs that pay more than that.

          • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            people take shit jobs with shit pay because they don’t have any other options

            so many hourly entry level jobs that pay more than that

            not for much longer would be my guess

  • meco03211@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Obviously a little late for this administration, but could the next liberal admin try beating them to the punch on this? Are there no liberal friendly judicial districts? Have one of those file a weak lawsuit to uphold the law. Then that could at least be referenced when they attack in a red area.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The problem is SCOTUS. Anything reaching them is going to come down on the Republican side.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The problem is there aren’t enough actual liberals left in the DNC. The majority of the DNC is more than happy to screw over workers to the benefit of corporations. What resistance they provide is mostly performative, as their real priorities are dictated by what the large corporate donors are paying for.

  • KaRunChiy@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It’s always texas, it’s never not texas, is texas just trying to become mississipi? Because it’s very quickly headed there.

  • whithom@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Haha. Sucks to be the Texas working class. Won’t get paid for overtime, wives dying from childbirth, lack of good health care, poor education.

    Ya voted, la la la la la 🧏

      • dellish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        27 minutes ago

        This is something I really don’t get in the US. How is it that a judge in one state/area/circuit whatever can make a decision that affects the entire nation? Having a bunch of courts spread around the place that people can cherry pick from to get the result they want seems so arbitrary.

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        28 minutes ago

        Just by federal law, not state law. Of course it will be a race to the bottom for certain states to attract take bribes from businesses.