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

Nurses Activism

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

Slow your roll, dude...employers have something like 90 days (I believe) to notify us of the DOL changes and how it might affect us.

Do you think this rule change materialized out of nowhere 2 days ago? This has been coming for many many months. If hospitals were going to make changes, they already would have announced them to go into affect yesterday.

In case you haven't heard, THERE'S A NURSING SHORTAGE!!! You think hospitals are going to cut compensation packages to nurses now? Leave your liberal paranoia and your politics aside and THINK!!!!!

I'd challenge anyone in this thread to cite even one example where employers have cut one nurse out of their OT because of this law.

Specializes in Trauma,ER,CCU/OHU/Nsg Ed/Nsg Research.
Do you think this rule change materialized out of nowhere 2 days ago? This has been coming for many many months. If hospitals were going to make changes, they already would have announced them to go into affect yesterday.

In case you haven't heard, THERE'S A NURSING SHORTAGE!!! You think hospitals are going to cut compensation packages to nurses now? Leave your liberal paranoia and your politics aside and THINK!!!!!

I'd challenge anyone in this thread to cite even one example where employers have cut one nurse out of their OT because of this law.

Actually, I DO know how long this has been going on, because I took part in the campaign to amend the language to protect RNs- so you're adressing the wrong person here. I'm also wondering how we can set our politics aside when this is a political issue that affects nurses. If you're thinking I just jumped on this bandwagon a couple of weeks ago, you're sorely mistaken. I've been watching legislation on this for quite some time, and as a Kentuckian, am quite familiar with Elaine Chao, and her husband Mitch McConnell. It's not "liberal paranoia" when you've seen the Harkin Amendment chopped to bits, and the Obey Amendment shot down- 2 items that would've protected more workers, that big corporations lobbied very hard against. If the republicans wanted to "protect more workers" with the new "fair pay" standards, then they would've OK'd these amendments (brought forth by Democrats), and not used our tax dollars to screw us out of overtime pay.

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

California Nurse's Association's stand on the issue:

California Nurses Association

Denounces Bush's New Overtime Pay Takeaway

Unpaid mandatory overtime compromises patient care and will drive RNs out of the profession.

The new federal overtime provisions, effective today threatens the right of Registered Nurses to receive overtime compensation and eliminates incentives for hospitals to address adequate staffing, the California Nurses Association said today.

"The overtime protections guaranteed to Registered Nurses for decades by federal law is now at risk for hourly and salaried nurses in union and non-union settings across America" said CNA Executive Director Rose Ann DeMoro. "This removes an important incentive that has restricted employers in the past from forcing nurses to work excessive overtime."

Registered Nurses are absent from the group of professions whose overtime pay is protected including fire fighters and police. CNA disputes claims by the Department of Labor that the changes only affect the ability of salaried non-union Registered Nurses to receive overtime.

"Though our members are protected for the moment by stringent language in our collective bargaining agreements backed by state overtime law, there are now no federal guarantees," DeMoro said. "Preserving overtime in a contract may now be used to force concessions in other areas during bargaining as employers are now doing with health care takeaways. This is an unacceptable step backwards for patient safety and for the advancement of the profession."

One change of concern to nurses is the addition of an exempt employee called a "team leader" defined simply as one who leads a team of other employs in completing a major project and who doesn't have to have direct supervisory responsibility. Hospitals have used the title in the past to attempt to classify RNs as supervisors and thus ineligible for union representation

"With the new RN staffing ratios and improved retirement benefits we have just begun to see results in terms of improved patient care and RN retention and recruitment in our hospitals throughout the state," said CNA President Deborah Burger, RN. "Scientific studies have proven time and again the direct correlation between forcing nurses to work excessive hours and poor patient outcomes."

CNA said the curtailment of overtime protection is part of a pattern of a growing erosion of other rights of working people under the Bush Administration. That trend is especially evident in federal labor law where administration appointees to the National Labor Relations Board have steadily weakened decades of protections for employee rights.

In recent months the National Labor Relations Board:

* Made moves to bar representation when a majority of workers signed cards requesting to join a union

* Allowed one employer to fire an entire RN bargaining unit, and another to withdraw union recognition -both on the basis of minor technicalities.

* Eliminated labor law rights for graduate student workers have been eliminated

* Weakened remedies for Labor Law violations

The California Nurses Association is the largest and fastest growing professional RN union in the nation representing 58,000 Registered Nurses in 165 facilities throughout the state.

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

http://vocusgr.vocus.com/grconvert1/webpub/ana/Profile.asp?Entity=PRAsset&EntityID=774&XSL=Asset&PublishType=GR+Asset

ANA Letter to the House supporting the Obey Amendment:

July 15, 2004

United States House of Representatives

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative:

On behalf of the American Nurses Association, I am writing to urge you to insist that the House leadership allows a vote on the Obey amendment to the Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations bill that would stop the U.S. Department of Labor from eroding the rights to overtime compensation for registered nurses and other workers covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The American Nurses Association (ANA) represents the nation?s registered nurses through its 54 state and territorial state nurses associations. Our members represent the interests of registered nurses practicing in hospitals and nursing homes and a wide range of other health care settings. The potential impact of the final overtime rule issued by the Department of Labor on registered nurses is a priority issue for ANA.

ANA believes it is essential to preserve the right to overtime compensation for registered nurses and is pleased that the Senate voted to approve the Harkin amendment which would provide an acceptable remedy to our concerns. It is now imperative that the House takes action to adopt the Obey amendment which provides similar protections for overtime rights before the Department of Labor rules take effect in August. The rule, as currently written, threatens the right of registered nurses to receive overtime compensation and eliminates any incentive for hospitals to address inadequate staffing and mandatory overtime resulting from the national nursing shortage.

Although the Department of Labor correctly asserts that the status of salaried registered nurses remains unchanged under this new rule, it ignores the fact that most registered nurses are paid on an hourly basis. Registered nurses have long met the ?duties test? to be considered learned professionals; however, because most registered nurses are paid on an hourly basis, they do not meet the second prong of the existing rules, i.e., the salary component, and therefore are entitled to overtime compensation. 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.

The amendment sponsored by Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), and adopted by the Senate, would reverse the harm to workers caused by the final rule without unraveling the provisions expanding overtime to some workers earning less than $23,660 per year. The amendment simply provides that no category of worker, including hourly-paid registered nurses, that is currently eligible for overtime compensation loses that right. The House should pass similar legislation as proposed by Rep. David Obey (D-Wisconsin) to roll back any portion of the rule that restricts eligibility for overtime pay. ANA urges you to support the Obey amendment to ensure that overtime compensation protection is included as part of the final version of the Labor, HHS, Education bill.

Sincerely,

Rose Gonzalez, MPS, RN

Director, Government Affairs

Do you think this rule change materialized out of nowhere 2 days ago? This has been coming for many many months. If hospitals were going to make changes, they already would have announced them to go into affect yesterday.

The regulation has been amended quite a bit. Not too long ago, police and firefighters were still losing their overtime pay in one version of the regulation. So employers may not have reacted to this yet because the language wasn't final until this week.

:coollook:

Cant we just all get along? I suppose we could all become independent agents. I will definitely pay myself overtime.! I have never been a fan of unions - my hospital treats their nurses GREAT so there's no need! However, if they start talking about pay cuts, (and they havent) you better believe unions are going to be BIG BUSINESS.

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

Update: Ky Nurses Association reps met with the Ky Board of Labor today to discuss loopholes in the changes, lack of RN protection, and the possibility of mandatory OT coming into effect here because of these changes. The Labor Board "took it under advisement," and will be deciding on whether they will be adopting the new rules or rejecting them (planned for Oct/Nov 2004). So, all of you nurses out there, stand up and be counted! Contact your state Labor Boards and Nurses Associations. Now is the time for your states to hear from you before they adopt these new rules. Once the states decide, then we may start to see the changes in the workplace.

Well, I won't get into the OT debate..I'm salaried, and work prn a couple other places, so I won't worry about until I have to. But...I must defend 'big business' somewhat. People slam big business for being all over this. Well, I won't debate rightness or wrongness..it does seem to me to be a flap over nothing right now. But... No big business, no big numbers of folks working, people..they're not ALL bad...do you want to buy a car made in someone's back yard? Or eat home-canned soup all the time? Or make your own dog food? Since big businesses pay huge taxes and have forests of regulations to adhere to, somewhere, somehow, a profit has to be made. I'm not excusing making on the backs of the workers, please understand that. I'm just talking in general. But I'm sick to death of the Class warfare promoted by the democrats, antibig business, antiwealth, except in redistribution...well, when Mrs Kerry and Mr Kennedy and a host of others decide to sell their 'big business' interests, give away all their money to social programs, and live on 50k a year w/ no perks or fancy homes, I'll believe they really mean what they preach.

If big business is making a reasonable profit around 5 % then that is ok but when they seek to meet the demand for low cost health care by harming (and I feel that under staffing is harmful both emotionally and physically) the people who are the end level providers then I have a problem.

Cant we just all get along? I suppose we could all become independent agents. I will definitely pay myself overtime.! I have never been a fan of unions - my hospital treats their nurses GREAT so there's no need! However, if they start talking about pay cuts, (and they havent) you better believe unions are going to be BIG BUSINESS.

That's really wonderful to hear that your hospital treats their nurses GREAT, and that's the way it should be everywhere, but we all know that that's not the case. I left the bedside as a critical care nurse a few years ago, because of the hours, the conditions, the mandatory overtime, the lack of appreciation, the feeling of burning out. Obviously, we weren't treated that way. The giving of yourself without getting anything back takes it's toll whether we want it to or not. When I found myself with nothing left for me or my family I realized the price that I was paying was too great. Any benefit to someone else was at my, or my family's expense.

I keep my eyes open in terms of what's happening in the field of nursing. I keep up with the literature, my CEU's, and I've been active with legislature concerning nursing, often writing letters to our congressmen when asked(even though deep down I wonder if I could ever return to the bedside unless conditions change), because I love nursing, I love the care that we give to our patients, that we endeavor to make one little change in the lives of one single other person is admirable. And I know that the only way we can change things is to be involved, and that we all must do our part, however small it may seem. And I had hoped that one day possibly things would improve so that I could return to the bedside. But this is a sad turn of events. Even just the mention of it, is sad. I believe that indeed one day they will at some point, granted it may not be now in the wake of the current nursing shortage but at some point, mandate overtime without compensation.

I don't get it. Nurses are leaving because of the present conditions and yet now they would consider this proposal. This is very sad news, indeed. Maybe it's time to return to school and perhaps another profession. And yes we should get along. Nurses are nurses because we care and we should care about one another as well. We have to stick together. Remember the squeaky wheel gets the grease. I think unions are long overdue.

That's really wonderful to hear that your hospital treats their nurses GREAT, and that's the way it should be everywhere, but we all know that that's not the case. I left the bedside as a critical care nurse a few years ago, because of the hours, the conditions, the mandatory overtime, the lack of appreciation, the feeling of burning out. Obviously, we weren't treated that way. The giving of yourself without getting anything back takes it's toll whether we want it to or not. When I found myself with nothing left for me or my family I realized the price that I was paying was too great. Any benefit to someone else was at my, or my family's expense.

I keep my eyes open in terms of what's happening in the field of nursing. I keep up with the literature, my CEU's, and I've been active with legislature concerning nursing, often writing letters to our congressmen when asked(even though deep down I wonder if I could ever return to the bedside unless conditions change), because I love nursing, I love the care that we give to our patients, that we endeavor to make one little change in the lives of one single other person is admirable. And I know that the only way we can change things is to be involved, and that we all must do our part, however small it may seem. And I had hoped that one day possibly things would improve so that I could return to the bedside. But this is a sad turn of events. Even just the mention of it, is sad. I believe that indeed one day they will at some point, granted it may not be now in the wake of the current nursing shortage but at some point, mandate overtime without compensation.

I don't get it. Nurses are leaving because of the present conditions and yet now they would consider this proposal. This is very sad news, indeed. Maybe it's time to return to school and perhaps another profession. And yes we should get along. Nurses are nurses because we care and we should care about one another as well. We have to stick together. Remember the squeaky wheel gets the grease. I think unions are long overdue.

You have just illustrated what I believe to be the real reason for the pseudo nursing shortage:

Working conditions and the way nurses are treated.

If big business is making a reasonable profit around 5 % then that is ok but when they seek to meet the demand for low cost health care by harming (and I feel that under staffing is harmful both emotionally and physically) the people who are the end level providers then I have a problem.

Who are you to define reasonable profit? That is a function of the market; supply and demand. Unless government becomes involved the market is very efficient.

+ Add a Comment