Time and a half for over 40 hours

Page 4 of 5  
Thanks, comrade. I'm glad someone else other than me can see the socialism going on around us. And fascism, too. . Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org . .
Sounds like socialism to me. "The poor employee is incapable of taking care of himself and making the right decisions in his life, so we will have to tell him what to do. How to live, when and what vacations to take, what benefits he should receive.... After all, we can;t have any of the ants in the colony just going off on their own, can we?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Socialism my ass - that's just the plight of the "contract worker" - He sells 1030 hours of his time (services) to a company for a given number of dollars, to be delivered on his schedule. To be legal in Canada would require that he "invoice" for his time - and he would be paid as a "cvontractor " or "supplier" - not an employee. His pay does not come out of "payroll"
That doge has been used up here by high-tech firms among others for years - but if proven by CRA that the "contractor" does not (or cannot) work for anyone else, and the "customer" dictates the starting time and work location of the "contractor", the "customer" can be demed an employer, and the "contractor" an "employee" for taxation purposes. That gets REAL expensive if either one is found guilty of "tax evasion"
In a legitimate situation, the "contractor" gets to claim "business expenses" that he would otherwise not be able to claim and the "customer" gets to write off the payment as other than "wages" which can also be a benefit at tax time (and on statements to shareholders)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Oh, not to worry. We are catching up. We are getting more and more socialized every year. I hate it, because it cripples the free enterprise system, but I am only one small voice in an ocean of shouting. When money is plentiful, the socialism seems to work pretty well. But when a small business is going under, these laws just serve to sink it faster. (which may not be a bad thing)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I love it. It ENABLES the free enterprize system. It sets standards that both the employer and employee can depend on. The employer knows what his responsibilities are, and between the employer and the employee most of the responsibilities are pree-paid and pre-funded. Without unwelcome surprises, business can concentrate on business - .
But this is the Canadian System - which you yanks call "socialist" - and consider the first step towards "communism". Yes, it has some socialist charachteristics - but it is a very capitalistic system in all other ways.
You can have your "ameican way".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

But not for long. The Socialists are now in power......
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Then say "thank you" and get back to the business of business. Don't make excuses.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

When I (was) retired (laid off, RIF'd, whatever - could have interviewed for a number of other positions but it was time to go) from IBM they paid me for 6 months, plus all vacation, and gave me a year's medical insurance, too (my retirement insurance picked up from there until I got a job with insurance). I started collecting my retirement immediately but will try to go another five years, until full SS age. Maybe longer, maybe not.
Layoffs are certainly different from firings, though. Layoffs are common even states that are not "at will".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Yes. I worked for IBM as a, "customer engineer" when I first left the US Navy in 1960. It was an interesting job, but a bit too structured for my blood. Big corporations can afford to give these perks, but small business seldom can, and that's why I think making laws to force them can be highly damaging to the society. Let those who can give those perks, but let smaller outfits find a way to eek out a living without government interference. One can always choose where one wants to work. I worked for both big and small outfits in my working life, and there were both advantages and disadvantages to both.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I partly agree. First, the government should not be telling me how to run my business and what I must give for benefits.
Well run smaller business are profitable and pay good salary and benefits. Some smaller business could afford to give better benefits if they charge appropriately for their services. I've seen many small employers try to increase their customer base by offering low, low prices. OK, if you want to work cheap fine with me, but don't complain you are not making enough money.
If you want to attract the best employees, you have to offer at least equal to what the competition offers. If I want to offer a better product than my competition, I have to have the best material and best people working with it. You get a different labor pool to choose workers from at $8 an hour, $10 an hour, $25 an hour.
Payroll has a lot to do with attitude. I was at a meeting with two small business owners. At the end, one said to the other, now I have to go back and do what I hat the most, payroll, and give a way a lot of money. The other said, that is the best time of the week. I know that if I'm paying a lot of money to employees, they are making money for me too.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/7/2013 1:46 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

But there is a conundrum. We tried the let business do anything it wants (Vanderbilt/Rockefeller/Morgan) and they showed how badly some can behave once they obtain control. I want minimal government involvement but I also recognize where it needs to be involved. We only need to look at the FSU to see the other side of the coin with total government management. Moral of the story? Extremes are never good.
Our current "free market" is just a fantasy thing often spouted by the extreme right. If it were an "free market" if you screw up you take it on the chin and in recent times that would simply mean that many banks and brokerages would simply be gone. Our current capitalist profit socialist loss system is just plain wrong.

Exactly, size has little to do with it. The ethics of the owner(s) is the determining factor.
I worked for a small company and received excellent benefits and profit sharing. In return I managed as if I was the owner and made a good income for him. The owner did not have heirs so he decided to sell the business. We produced a great product, had a great reputation and customers were treated well and kept coming back. It was bought by a much larger company whose attitude was that employees were a burden and clearly not as smart as the owner. Little by little the key people left. The place lasted 3 more years before it was bought cheap by a competitor.

Its that greed thing. Some is good and excessive greed where you think you are the most important person and everyone else is dirt is wrong.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Yes. Qnd some small growing businessesw offer their own stock as part of the salery package, so the employees becomd owners with a continuously growing percentage of the company. this gives them another incentive to work hard and make the company money.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Huh? The issue is firing people. What does that have to do with perks (other than do they get paid the perks they've earned)>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

How people are let go, whether at the whim of one3 person, or by a board that investigates and discusses the propos3d lay-off at length, together with hearings that both the prospective layed off employee and his manager can voice their objections, is just another "perk" that large corporations can afford, and small businesses cannot.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You're not making any sense. Why should any employer be forced to have a "board", or "hearings" or any other such nonsense? If your boss doesn't think you're doing the work, gone. If you don't like the boss, you can fire him without so much as notice.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Sure, but what you can do, and what most large corporations do do are two different things. Especially if they have to spend a lot of time and money training you to do whatever it is you do for them. They are not likely to just let some bozo fire people that they have invested lots of money in for any or no reason at all....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

...and how is that a public policy problem?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

If by, "public policy" you are talking about state created laws that force industries to all treat layoffs the same, then you are interfering with the ability of some smaller companies to be able to stay in business. but why are you binng so antagonistic? You can post about what you know and want to post about.... How about letting me do the same without your dumb questions?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

How about you figuring out *what* you're talking about so we can have a discussion. You're constantly changing the subject. <sheesh!>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 09 Apr 2013 13:34:28 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz wrote:

Yep, IKWYABWAI *IS* the only argument you have. Typical lefty - dumb as a stump.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

There is no "firing board" required in Ontario Canada. The immediate supervisor thinks you are slacking? He writes you up. He thinks you are incompetent? he writes you up. You've been written up twice - you are on notice. He writes you up one more time - you can be GONE - wih cause - no severance - no pogey.
Works well for the employer - and is "fair" to the employee. Gross negligence or insubordination can also be used as "for cause" but is more difficult to prove. There are other "for cause" situations - criminal acts on the job, among others.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.