• FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s hard to imagine how an hourly worker is going to not loose pay; going from 40 to 32 hours.

    When you’re hourly… you’re, you know, paid hourly. The pay rate stays the same and you loose hours, not pay. The effect is the same, but technicalities are then soul of the legal profession.

    • Doc Avid Mornington@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The article literally tells you that this was done before, to give us the 40 day standard we now have. It worked before, and the article also points out that other countries have recently reduced work weeks under 40 hours. How is it hard to imagine that something that factually has happened could happen?

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        32
        ·
        9 months ago

        Can’t really do that,

        The US government isn’t party to private contracts. Can’t dictate terms in that manner.

        Unless you literally want to socialize all economic activities everywhere.

        • Doc Avid Mornington@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          9 months ago

          I mean, they actually can. That’s a completely facetious argument. Laws can set standards without defining everything. It’s done all the time.

        • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          The US government isn’t party to private contracts

          Learn what at-will employment is and how much of the US is stuck with it

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            I’m fully aware of at will employment.

            I fail to see how that helps with the 32 workweek. You’re not going to get a general strike, and there’s plenty of people who will happily move into that job.

            • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              If you’re fully aware of what at-will is then you’d know saying

              The US government isn’t party to private contracts

              Is silly when the overwhelming majority of employees in this country do not have a private contract for employment

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                Yes they do.

                A contract is simply an agreement- in the case of employment, to provide work for payment. Even at will, that is a contract. The contract can be terminated any time at will by either party, but it’s still a contract.

        • yarr@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          The US government isn’t party to private contracts. Can’t dictate terms in that manner.

          Nonsense. Try writing a contract that makes someone your slave and see how enforceable it is. How do you think minimum wage works? Walmart is paying that out of the goodness of their heart? No… they are forced to by the feds.

    • notfromhere@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      9 months ago

      Hopefully it reclassifies weekly work hour threshold to be considered for full time benefits. Either way it’s going to be a bumpy ride. At least someone is trying something

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        The irs already defines full time as 30 hours per week or 130 hours per month.

        The ACA and FMLA also use that definition as full time.

        The only change would be to require paying OT at 32 instead of 40- but that will have consequences of reducing hours, and not improving pay.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I suppose we would have to raise the minimum wage, and since neither party wants that, it’s dead in the water.

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah, I don’t understand how the “no loss of pay” part is implemented either.

      Even if there is something in the bill that requires overtime pay, that’s just a multiplier to the base wage. What keeps an unscrupulous employer from just dropping the base rate by 20%?

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s not even a question of dropping the base rate.

        Hourly workers are paid per hour. I mean it’s pretty basic, right. The terms of employment are your paid at a rate of x per hour.

        They’re just going to cut hours- not pay. And it’s a bit ridiculous to expect that companies are going to just increase effective rates when they still need the same number of hours worked.

        They’re still going to be paying for that labor. have to pay someone for the hours you can’t work because paying overtime is one of the carnal sins of middle Managment.

        A 32 hour workweek just doesn’t translate well to retail or anywhere that’s not white collar office jobs.

        • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          And add to that, anybody who is already salaried is just going to end up working the same 40+ that they’re already doing.

          Out of all those jobs I had, only 1 gave me anything for OT, and that was just TOIL, which is nice but not sufficient when you’re the only person in your position.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            I know a guy that spent 2 or 3 years with some stellar spreadsheets; he just coasted turning out the data (which was right,).

            that stopped when he shared the spreadsheets with a few friends… then he kept getting asked to fix other people’s spreadsheets. which… would be a cool gig; if people weren’t so awful at spreadsheets.