New overtime law "myths and facts" Yes, hourly RNs are affected

Published

http://www.aflcio.org/yourjobeconomy/overtimepay/mythsfactsheet.cfm?RenderForPrint=1

Myths and Facts on the Bush Administration's New Overtime Regulation

MYTH: Under the Bush Administration's new overtime laws, very few if any workers making between $23,660 and $100,000 a year will lose overtime eligibility.

FACT: The new Bush Administration overtime laws are written such that many workers who currently earn overtime pay in this pay range are likely to lose it. For example:

Concurrent Duties--Under the old rule, an employee who spent a substantial amount of his or her time on nonexempt work but who also performed some exempt supervisory duties generally remained eligible for overtime pay (under old rule 541.116). Under the new rule, that person will generally be an exempt executive, and not eligible for overtime pay. (New section 541.106)

EXAMPLE--An assistant manager in fast-food, grocery or retail may spend most of his or her time performing "line" duties, like burger flipping or ringing up customers, but still be "in charge" of other workers at the same time. Under the old rule, many of these workers still received overtime pay. Under the new rule, they may very well lose their overtime pay, even if they make as little as $23,660 a year--a wage that qualifies a family for food stamps.

Salary Basis Test--The old rule required an employer to pay a worker a salary in order to deprive the worker of the right to overtime pay. The new rule (541.604) defines salary as an hourly wage, so long as the employer guarantees a minimum wage that bear a loose relationship to hourly compensation.

EXAMPLE--Registered nurses (RNs) are very likely to lose their overtime pay rights. RNs' work satisfies the duties test for professionals, but they are paid hourly, and they don't have much freedom to come and go. If they come in to work late, they are docked an hour's pay, for example. They used to receive overtime pay for the many hours of overtime they are required to perform. Under the new rule, they are likely to lose that right.

There are many other examples of how workers in this salary range are likely to lose overtime pay rights. In general, the final overtime regulation will have an especially large impact on workers with minimal supervisory or "leadership" responsibilities, workers who perform minimal amounts of administrative work, workers with special skills, and certain kinds of employees in the computer field.

MYTH: The new Bush Administration overtime law merely clarifies murky law, thus eliminating unnecessary lawsuits. The law is part of its "proven commitment to protecting workers' rights."

FACT: The new Bush Administration overtime law, in fact, lays out in the regulation exemptions which corporations have not been able to win in the courts. For example:

Journalists--There has been a lot of litigation over whether journalists have the right to receive overtime pay. Courts ruled both ways, based on the facts of each case, and many decisions prohibited journalists from losing the right to overtime. The Bush Administration points to the cases in which journalists have lost the right to overtime as the basis for their new rule, which now makes it much harder for journalists to get overtime pay. In fact, there's a big difference between court cases in a limited number of jurisdictions and the new Bush Administration federal rule, which broadens the exemption nationwide for all journalists. (New section 541.302)

Insurance claims adjusters--Again, court cases on whether insurance claims employees receive overtime pay have gone both ways--some courts have said they are exempt and other have said they should receive overtime pay. This is a very heavily-litigated field, and corporations have not been able to win a blanket victory. The Bush Administration has handed them that victory by changing the nationwide regulation to specify that these employees are generally disqualified from receiving overtime pay. (New Section 541.203(a)) A quarter of insurance claims adjusters make less than $35,000 a year.

MYTH: The Bush Administration merely updated the rules to reflect today's modern workplace, but did not strip workers of overtime pay rights.

FACT: The Bush Administration could have supported the Harkin Amendment which allows them to make any updates to the rules, as long as no worker loses overtime pay. In fact, the Bush Administration has made it MORE difficult for many workers in the structure of today's workplace to receive overtime pay.

Team leaders--Many workplaces are moving toward having a team leader structure under which co-workers oversee one another's work. In the old overtime law, the only people disqualified from receiving overtime pay were "staff" who oversaw "special projects." The new Bush Administration overtime law changes that language so that people who do "line" work--whether it's turning out hamburgers or ringing up sales--and who oversee "major projects" will be likely to lose overtime pay rights. "Special projects" implied that there was a definite start and end to the project, whereas the new "major projects" could go on indefinitely, thus knocking many team leaders out of overtime pay rights.

MYTH: The Bush Administration has cut back on the number of lawsuits which will arise over overtime pay.

FACT: The 500 plus page rule and preamble is very likely to lead to MORE, not LESS, litigation. The rule is, at best, ambiguous. It essentially invites employers to push on these ambiguities, forcing workers who lose overtime pay to challenge their new status in court.

Copyright © 2004 AFL-CIO

If I'm not understanding this correctly please educate me.

"Registered nurses who are paid on an hourly basis should receive overtime pay. However, registered nurses who are registered by the appropriate State examining board generally meet the duties requirements for the learned professional exemption, and if paid on a salary basis of at least $455 per week, may be classified as exempt."

I'm understanding this to mean that if you are an hourly RN you are entitled to overtime. If you are a salaried RN you are not entitled to overtime (unless your salary is less than $455/week). I'm not understanding how this is a change in the current wage and earnings rules already in place.

I've always known before I took a position whether I was salaried or hourly, and I always knew that if I was salaried I was not eligible for overtime.

Am I missing something?

If I'm not understanding this correctly please educate me.

"Registered nurses who are paid on an hourly basis should receive overtime pay. However, registered nurses who are registered by the appropriate State examining board generally meet the duties requirements for the learned professional exemption, and if paid on a salary basis of at least $455 per week, may be classified as exempt."

I'm understanding this to mean that if you are an hourly RN you are entitled to overtime. If you are a salaried RN you are not entitled to overtime (unless your salary is less than $455/week). I'm not understanding how this is a change in the current wage and earnings rules already in place.

I've always known before I took a position whether I was salaried or hourly, and I always knew that if I was salaried I was not eligible for overtime.

Am I missing something?

Unless you have a contract your employer can switch you to $455.00 a week salary at any time.

Of course you don't have to stay on that job.

Edited to add that our wonderful manager is salaried. She would make more money if paid for the hours she works. Other managers don't have that committment and their staff and the patients suffer.

If I'm not understanding this correctly please educate me.

"Registered nurses who are paid on an hourly basis should receive overtime pay. However, registered nurses who are registered by the appropriate State examining board generally meet the duties requirements for the learned professional exemption, and if paid on a salary basis of at least $455 per week, may be classified as exempt."

I'm understanding this to mean that if you are an hourly RN you are entitled to overtime. If you are a salaried RN you are not entitled to overtime (unless your salary is less than $455/week). I'm not understanding how this is a change in the current wage and earnings rules already in place.

I've always known before I took a position whether I was salaried or hourly, and I always knew that if I was salaried I was not eligible for overtime.

Am I missing something?

Nope, that is how I read it too.

steph

Specializes in Trauma,ER,CCU/OHU/Nsg Ed/Nsg Research.

From the ANA:

http://vocusgr.vocus.com/grconvert1/webpub/ana/ProfileIssue.asp?IssueID=3726|House&XSL=ProfileIssue&hidLegislatorIDs=&optLetterType=&AdditionalFormInformation=

While the duties test has not changed, the definition of a salaried employee has been altered to allow salaried compensation to be calculated on an hourly or a shift basis, on top of a guaranteed minimum. This creates a degree of legal ambiguity that employers may try to exploit. Creating doubt about registered nurses' right to overtime pay threatens ongoing efforts to retain and recruit nurses - particularly in a time when mandatory overtime is a common practice and RNs are in short supply.

From the DOL's website- the new definition of "salary," which is ambiguous:

http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/fs17g_salary.htm

Being paid on a "salary basis" means an employee regularly receives a predetermined amount of compensation each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent, basis.

"Less frequent basis" can be left open to hourly if a business so chooses.

I hope this clears things up a bit for some of you.

"Exempt" means exempt from getting overtime pay (not exempt from the new law). I had to read it several times, too. Go to http://www.rnmag.com. Use keywords: nurse overtime pay. They explain it a little better as it pertains to nursing.

From the DOL's website- the new definition of "salary," which is ambiguous:http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/fs17g_salary.htm

Being paid on a "salary basis" means an employee regularly receives a predetermined amount of compensation each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent, basis.

"Less frequent basis" can be left open to hourly if a business so chooses.

I hope this clears things up a bit for some of you.

Thanks Laura. That does explain a lot. It might also be helpful to read the regulation itself:

http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/regulations.pdf

The other problem, as I see it, is that RNs are specifically mentioned under the learned professionals exemption from overtime. (p. 7) Unlike policemen and firefighters, who are guaranteed overtime, RNs are only mentioned in the context of being exempt from it.

:uhoh21:

As John Adams? said, "We must all hang together or we must assuredly hang seperately."

Our facility has let several nurses go that were needing surgery, etc under the guise of can't perform their job when they been doing it for years and the injury was probably from being on their feet/job for years. With Medicare reimbursement down, ($10,000 pd on $100,000 claim) read:90,000 write off hospitals I believe are going to use everything they can to cut costs which is scary for those of us toiling away in school, ready to go into the profession. I will watch with interest. As it is, most of the admin/paper pushers are EXEMPT right now anyway in our facility. But hate to hear this will affect hourly people too.

Thanks to all posters for increasing my knowledge of the subject.

I believe in taking any special group information as gospel or of any special interest group with a grain of salt. I would have to consider the source. Just my thoughts.

Specializes in Trauma,ER,CCU/OHU/Nsg Ed/Nsg Research.

The other problem, as I see it, is that RNs are specifically mentioned under the learned professionals exemption from overtime. (p. 7) Unlike policemen and firefighters, who are guaranteed overtime, RNs are only mentioned in the context of being exempt from it.

:uhoh21:

Thank GOD somebody else understands...lol. They added in LPNs as eligible for OT, but not RNs. This is because RNs meet the new 2 prong test for exemption (i.e. not eligible for OT pay unless the employer wants to give it to you).

Specializes in Trauma,ER,CCU/OHU/Nsg Ed/Nsg Research.

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=267&row=0

THE GRINCH THAT STOLE LABOR DAY

by Greg Palast

Friday, August 29, 2003

E-Mail Article

Printer Friendly Version

In celebration of the working person's holiday, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao has announced the Bush Administration's plan to end the 60-year-old law which requires employers to pay time-and-a-half for overtime.

I'm sure you already knew that -- if you happened to have run across page 15,576 of the Federal Register.

According to the Register, where the Bush Administration likes to place its little gifts to major campaign donors, 2.7 million workers will lose their overtime pay for a "benefit" of $1.53 billion. I put "benefit" in quotes because, in the official cost-benefit analysis issued by Bush's Labor Department, the amount employers will now be able to slice out of workers' pockets is tallied on the plus side of the rules change.

Nevertheless, workers getting their pay snipped shouldn't complain, because they will all be receiving promotions. These employees will be re-classified as managers exempt from the law. The change is promoted by the National Council of Chain Restaurants. You've met these 'managers' - they're the ones in the beanies and aprons whose management decisions are, "Hold the lettuce on that."

My favorite of Chao's little amendments would re-classify as "exempt professionals" anyone who learned their skill in the military. In other words, thousands of veterans will now lose overtime pay. I just can't understand why Bush didn't announce that one when he landed on the aircraft carrier.

CHOICE NUMBER FOUR: BREAK THE LAW

Now I should say that, according to Chao's press office, the changes will actually extend overtime benefits to 1.3 million burger flippin' managers. How does that square with the billion dollar "benefit" to business owners? Simple: The Chao hounds at the Labor Department suggest that employers CUT WAGES so that, added to the new "overtime" pay, the employees won't actually take home a dime more.

I can hear the moaners and bleeding hearts saying this sounds like the Labor Department is telling Big Business how to evade the law. Yep, that's what the Department is doing. Right there on page 15,576 of the Federal Register it says,

"Affected employers would have four choices concerning potential payroll costs: ? (4) converting salaried employees' basis of pay to an hourly rate that result in virtually no changes to the total compensation paid those workers."

And in case some employer is dense as a president and doesn't get the hint, Comrade Chao repeats, "?The fourth choice above results in virtually no (or only a minimal) increase in labor costs."

For decades the courts have thrown the book at cheapskate bosses who chisel workers out of legal overtime by cutting base pay this way but now they'll have a new defense: Bush made me do it.

But then, there likely will not be any cases against employers anyway since Chao herself is supposedly the labor cop whose job it is to stop paycheck theft. She's well qualified for that job. Her resume reads, "Married to Republican Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky." I called her press office to ask if she qualifies for overtime, but they'd left the office early.

And there is good news for our sporting President. Word from the White House is he'll be golfing on the Labor Day weekend. Under Chao's rules he need not worry if he wants to replay that hole. "Exempt professionals" who cannot earn overtime - once defined as doctors, lawyers and those with specialized college degrees - will now include anyone who provides skilled advice like caddies ("You might try the other end of the club, Mr. President").

THE ACORN FALLS ONLY SO FAR

Finally, on this Labor Day weekend, it's time this nation took a cold look at the issue of hard-core unemployment. Neo-conservatives have warned us about families that pass on joblessness from generation to generation.

Take, for example, the sad case of the Bush family. When Poppy Bush was president unemployment hit a generational high of over 9 million Americans. Bill Clinton, through education and hard work, put more than 3 million of those citizens back on the job.

Now Bush Junior, repeating his family pattern of encouraging joblessness, has presided over the return of unemployment for 9 million Americans.

This was not unexpected, sociologists warn us. Hard core unemployment, through failed schooling and a don't-care attitude, takes on a nearly genetic character. The acorn falls only so far from the tree. Especially when the nut falls on its head.

Greg Palast is author of the New York Times bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. Subscribe to his writings for Britain's Observer and Guardian newspapers, and view his investigative reports for BBC Television's Newsnight, at http://www.GregPalast.com

They added in LPNs as eligible for OT, but not RNs. This is because RNs meet the new 2 prong test for exemption (i.e. not eligible for OT pay unless the employer wants to give it to you).

Exactly. If this went to court, I doubt even the most liberal judge could rule in favor of RNs on this one ... Simply because they went out of their way to include overtime for LVNs and exclude overtime for RNs. There's no language addressing or clarifying the hourly issue for RNs at all.

:o

Being paid on a “salary basis” means an employee regularly receives a predetermined amount of compensation each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent, basis.

"Less frequent basis" can be left open to hourly if a business so chooses.

I understand what you're saying. I guess the bottom line for employees is to know whether or not you're salaried (exempt from overtime) or hourly (eligible for overtime). Employers cannot oscillate between the two, otherwise they'd have to have employees filling out W-4's everytime they report for work.

Unless you are covered by a Union contract, an employer can change you from hourly compenstion to salary any time they wish to. There goes your OT rights. That said I don't think in the current job market environment that many employers will take advantage of this abiliity. Once the shortage doesn't exist, especially in a local environment you will see employers make the change. There is just to much money to be saved. And if your institution is in a financial difficulty the pressure to change will be enormous.

Exactly. As for those of you who say the "shortage" will protect you from losing overtime- Nursing "shortages" have come and gone before. Employers and health care corporations are working very hard to import every available foreign nurse, and nursing school enrollments are increasing exponetially.

Many experts disagree on the impact of these new laws. We will find out soon enough.

+ Join the Discussion