Strong stuff from Molly Ivins about these bills: 

Molly Ivins 
April 24, 2003 
http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?next=3&ColumnsName=miv 
[only valid for current columns. old ones may be available
through the Washington Post.] 

Austin, Texas - Boy, there is no shortage of creatively
terrible ideas from the Republican Party these days.  Those
folks are just full of notions about how to make people's
lives worse - one horrible idea after another bursting out
like popcorn - and all of them with these sickeningly cute
names attached to them.  

Consider the Family Time and Workplace Flexibility Act
(Senate version) and the Family Time Flexibility Act (House
version).  The Bush administration is leading the charge
with proposed new rules that will erode the 40-hour workweek
and affect more than 80 million workers now protected by the
Fair Labor Standards Act.  

To hear the Republicans tell it, you'd think these were
family-friendly bills, something like Clinton's Family Leave
Act, designed to help you balance the difficult combined
demands of work and family.  With such a smarm of butter
over their visages do the Republicans go on about the joys
of "flexibility" and "freedom of choice" that you would have
to read the bills for maybe 30 seconds before figuring out
they're about repealing the 40-hour workweek and ending
overtime.   

As The American Prospect magazine notes, when Republicans
talk about "flexibility," it means letting business do
whatever it wants without standards, mandates or worker and
consumer rights.  Ever since FDR's New Deal, working
overtime gets you time-and-a-half in money, which has the
happy effect of holding the work week down to 40 hours - or
at least preventing it from ballooning grossly.   

The proposed Bush rules, which the two Republican bills
codify and expand, would: 

- Exclude previously protected workers who were entitled to
overtime by reclassifying them as managers.  Companies are
already using this ploy where they can get away with it. 
Say you're frying burgers on the night shift at McDonald's,
making overtime, and suddenly - congratulations - you're the
assistant night manager, with no raise and no overtime.   

- Eliminate certain middle-income workers from overtime
protections by adding an income limit, above which workers
no longer qualify for overtime.  You like that?  You make
too much to earn overtime.   

- Remove overtime protection from large numbers of workers
in aerospace, defense, health care, high tech and other
industries.   

Pay attention, this one is coming right out of your
paycheck.  

Big Bidness is lobbying hard on these bills.  If you work
overtime to pay your bills, look out.  The trick is,
employers get to substitute comp time for overtime, and the
employers get the right to decide when - or even if - a
worker gets to take his or her comp time.  The legislation
provides no meaningful protection against employers
requiring workers to take time off instead of cash and no
protection against employers assigning overtime only to
workers who agree to take time instead of cash.  Everybody
gets screwed on this one, except the bosses.  Isn't it
lovely?  

The proposed rules changes and the Republican bills provide
a strong financial incentive for employers to lengthen the
workweek, on top of an already staggering load.  By 1999, in
one decade, the average work year had expanded by 184 hours,
according to Kevin Phillips' book Wealth and Democracy.   

He writes, "The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the
typical American works 350 hours more per year than the
typical European, the equivalent of nine work weeks."  

The bills give employers a new right to delay paying any
wages for overtime work for as long as 13 months.  According
to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute, under the
new bills an employee who works overtime hours in a given
week might not receive any pay or time off for that work
until more than a year later, at the employer's
discretion.   

"Without receiving interest or security, the employees in
essence lend their overtime pay to the employers in the hope
of getting back some time later as paid time off," the
report states.  "Employees' overtime compensation is put at
risk of loss in the event of business failure and closure,
bankruptcy or fraud.  Furthermore, employees get no
guarantee of time off when they want or need it."  

The EPI explains why Big Bidness loves these bills: "A
company with 200,000 FLSA-covered employees might get 160
free hours at $7 an hour from each of them (160 hours is the
maximum allowed under the bills).  That's the equivalent of
$224 million that the company wouldn't have to pay its
workers for up to a year after the worker has earned it. 
Considering that, under normal circumstances, the employer
might have to pay 6 percent interest for a commercial loan
of this magnitude, it could save $13 million by relying on
comp time to 'borrow' from its employees instead."  

The slick marketing and smoke on this one are a wonder to
behold.  We're being told that private sector workers will
get the same "benefit" of comp time as public employees. 
Wow, keen, except the government has no profit motive for
pushing comp time instead of overtime.  Boy, does this
stink.  


Molly Ivins 
5 June 2003 

[other material cut] ... 

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, it is hard to keep up with how
much damage is being done.  Tom (the Exterminator) DeLay,
House majority leader, says the 6.5 million working people
who got cut out of the tax cut at the last minute are
S.O.L.  No reconsideration will be allowed - unless he gets
MORE tax cuts for the rich!  I love it: These people have no
shame.   

The House will take up getting rid of the 40-hour workweek
on June 5.  They have their priorities, and repealing the
Fair Labor Standards Act - in place since the 1930s - is one
of them.  In one of those annoying little Republican
exercises in cheap misdirection, this particular bill to
screw workers is misleadingly titled the Family Time
Flexibility Act.   

Cute, eh?  As though they were doing you a big favor.  The
only enforcement mechanism in the 40-hour work week is that
employers have to pay time-and-a-half if they make you work
more than 40 hours.  Under this charmer, if you work
overtime, your employer can pay you with straight comp time,
one hour for one hour, instead of time-and-a-half wages,
thus saving the corporations millions.   

Let us count the number of ways this is a truly El Stinko
idea.  If your employer doesn't have to pay you any extra
for working overtime, why shouldn't he/she work you 'til you
drop?  Lots of families depend on overtime pay just to make
it through the month.  There've been times I would've a lot
rather had time than money for overtime, but I want that to
be my choice, not my boss's.  

This son of a gun is a job-killer.  If an employer can
overwork the people he's got now without paying extra, why
would he hire additional employees?  It's bad for the
economy.  This doesn't "give" workers flexibility, it takes
away their right to get time-and-a-half.  

People, I mentioned the other day that it takes more than
singing "I'm Proud to Be an American" to keep this country
free.  This is not an abstract, constitutional right.  This
is about you getting screwed.  If y'all can't stand up for
yourselves on this one, and raise hell with your
congresspeople, you deserve to work overtime without extra
pay.   

All over this country, working people are losing out.  We've
lost 2.7 million jobs, health insurance is going up like a
rocket, salaries are shrinking, and wait'll you see what
they're fixing to do to your pension.  If y'all don't speak
up now instead of griping later, the fat-cat lobbyists for
big business are going to push this right through.  Don't
say no one warned you.  

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

Stephen Straker 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
Vancouver, B.C.   
[Outgoing mail scanned by Norton AntiVirus]



_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to