Time and a half for over 40 hours

[Bill Graham]

Yeah.... She would be better off working as a stunt man in an Evil Knevil picture.....

[Frank]

I was a professional too and exempt from the labor laws. Never considered it a disadvantage as non-exempts did not make anywhere near as much even with a lot of overtime.

But, this is not true for girl in question and she is in a quandary at minimum wage without overtime but will be unemployed if she turns in employer. Bad deal, but maybe she should just go along with it for a while if she needs the money. This is just a starter job that most people would not want to remain in. I'm hearing today that college graduates are taking jobs like this just to make a little money and keep busy until something better develops.

[krw]

A long time ago, I was working long hours (70+hrs per week) along side another engineer and a technician. The Technician was pulling down over a grand a week, with OT. Each of us were making a third of that. It pissed the other engineer off, no end.

If she actually ever puts any OT in.

I used to live in a college town. We knew several students who waited tables through school. There's good money in that. The hours are great, too.

[krw]

Personal responsibility? What planet do you live on?

[clare]

Do like I did back in 1971, when I left my first job. I turned in my time records to the department of labour and a couple months later I got my "banked overtime" X 1.5. And the other guys I worked with got theirs too, whether they stayed or had already left.

[Ed Pawlowski]

I have to disagree on one point. There is no reason to ask a prospective employer if they follow the law or cheat the employees. You expect that they follow the law as reputable businesses do.

There is a chance here that the owner actually meant they do not give more than 40 hours, thus no overtime. That is fine, but if you work more than 40 for any reason, you must be paid properly.

Example: My daughter works for a medical practice. The manager told the workers the new rule is: you get paid for what you are scheduled to work. Usually 37 to 40 hours. If you work over your schedule for the week you get no extra. If you work more than 1 hour less than scheduled, the time is deducted.

That policy was in force for less than an hour. If you make employees exempt, you don't have to pay overtime, however, you still have to pay them the full wage even if they work less.

Same manager also tried to save money by having the office open at the same time as the first patient is scheduled, allowing no prep time or even for the patients to come inside to wait if they arrive a few minutes early. That did not last past one day either.

[Ned Flanders]

It seems her hands maybe tied if she wants to stick it out for a while.

My wife went in to a business for a shift on a trial bases. After the one 9 hour shift (she was asked to stay extra) my wife decided she could not work there because of the owners constantly barking dog and crying baby (and this was in a shop in a mall?)...

Two weeks later she had not been paid so she emailed the woman asking for her 8 hours pay and one hour OT. The woman told her she does not pay OT.

My wife emailed her back with a copy of the labour laws... a week later she received a cheque in the mail for the correct amount.

Sometimes owners or managers need a reminder of the labour laws.

[Bill Graham]

Almost anyone at almost any time can be fired for almost anything. There is no way to get inside your boss's mind and know why he wants to keep some people and fire others, and he can come up with a number of reasons to get rid of most anyone. (if he has half a brain) So, there is little one can do unless one has some written proof or recorded proof that ones boss has it in for them for some reason other than job performance. This is true of even top executives. As a matter of fact, it is more true of top executives than it is of underlings....

[clare]

IN CANADA, a boss needs to write you up 3 times, giving you the written notice, before he can fire you "with cause" Firing "without cause" costs him money. He has to pay severence - and you get to collect employment insurance if you have worked enough hours to qualify.

Don't know how it is in the USA.

[TimR]

I would be very surprised if a new employee in a convenience store were scheduled for enough hours to earn benefits, let alone overtime.

Most service area employers hold the hours below 20 so they don't need to provide benefits like sick leave, vacation, health insurance, retirement, etc.

[krw]

Since you mentioned "labour" laws, I'll assume you're not a left-pondian. In the US, it's not considered OT until 40hrs in one week. ...and that doesn't necessarily include vacation/holiday time (8 hours holiday + 44hrs work = 48hrs straight pay + 4hrs OT).

That's jurisdiction dependant, here. Some states are "at will" states. Anyone can be fired for any reason (other than the typical discrimination of protected classes), or no reason. Others make it (only) slightly more difficult for employers.

[Metspitzer]

I told my niece to just keep good records of the days and hours she works and just see how things go.

I was asking her how she liked her new job, and she says she likes. She mentioned that she keeps quite a large amount of start up cash. She says that if the delivery trucks will take cash, they pay them in cash. hummmmm.

[krw]

There are many reasons for that. Mostly it's done by businesses that can't get credit from their vendors. Sometimes it's so the money can go underground but it's not often that blatant.

[George]

Good business. If they have a lot of cash customers they need to pay the bank to take it. So when a vendor delivers something you pay them cash and get a receipt.

[Bill Graham]

I don't know either, but suppose the company is going out of business, and the, "boss" can't pay you another dime because he, and his company are dirt broke? What then, pussycat? Do you get to pluck some bucks from that money tree in Washington DC?

[krw]

Ever hear of "bankruptcy" and "stand in line"?

[Bill Graham]

In a truely capitalistic system, no company would want to get rid of a productive employee that they have hired and trained to do their job and who does it acceptably well. Most companies have a review board that that oversees requests to let individuals go. but in small businesses, the only review board is the owner of the business, so if he wants to rid himself of you, you have little choice but to leave.

[krw]

That's true in a not so truly capitalistic system.

Most? Hardly. Most are small businesses that don't bother with any such thing.

As you should, if he's not happy with your performance for *WHATEVER* reason. It *is* his business. If he's a fool, he'll shortly find that out, too.

[Bill Graham]

Of course. but conversely, have you ever heard of letting somebody go because you can't afford to keep them? There are many reasons for letting employees go. It is not always a matter of choice.

[Bill Graham]

Yes. I have known businesses that were only in business, apparently, to spend their benefactor's money, and expected to go out of business. (The owner was cheating his backers) And, of course we all know about drug sellers who operated businesses as a front for their drug selling operations.