|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
New Bush administration rules slash overtime pay for millions
of workers
By John Levine
28 August 2004
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
The Department of Labors FairPay rules came
into effect August 23, taking away the right to overtime compensation
for millions of workers. Congress allowed the rule changes to
take effect in a vote July 10 in the House of Representatives,
which defeated a measure to stop the new rules, by a margin of
213 to 210.
The rules will impact almost every workplace, dramatically
reducing the scope of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, one
of the few social reforms remaining from the New Deal period.
The Bush administration action highlights the impunity with which
big business feels it can treat American workers, as long as the
working class remains subordinated to the trade union bureaucracy
and the Democratic Party.
The new rules make overtime pay mandatory for hours worked
beyond 40 a week for any worker earning less than $23,660 a year,
or $455 a week, regardless of job duties. This old cap of $8,060
a year, or $155 a week, set in the 1970s, had become ludicrously
low because it was not indexed to inflation. Anyone working 40
hours a week at the minimum wage makes over $200 a week and is
thus not covered by the old guarantee. The new ceiling is likely
to be equally meaningless in a few years, since it is also not
indexed to inflation.
Aside from these lowest paid workers, barely above the official
poverty line, the only workers guaranteed overtime pay under the
new rules are those classified as law enforcement, firefighters,
paramedics and blue-collar factory workers. These provisions were
added in response to widespread concern that the new rules would
strip these workers of their longstanding entitlement to overtime
pay. They dont represent any expansion of eligibility.
The new rules bar overtime pay for the highest-paid sections
of the working class and middle class, those making over $100,000
a year.
The vast majority of workers fall in between these two benchmarks,
making more than $23,660 and less than $100,000 a year. Whether
they are entitled overtime pay after 40 hours a week depends on
how their work is categorizedtraditionally foremen and other
working supervisors have not been eligible for overtime pay. The
Bush administration has changed the descriptive categories used
to classify millions of jobs so as to exempt previously eligible
workers from receiving overtime pay.
This has been accomplished by declaring five broad categoriesexecutive,
administrative, professional, computer, and outside salesineligible
for overtime protection. Anyone paid on a salaried basis and falling
into any of these categories, as vaguely defined by the Labor
Department, will lose the legal right to their overtime pay. Their
employers will have full discretion to eliminate time-and-a-half
or other premium pay for work after 40 hours a week.
The Labor department defines the five categories on their web
site. The administrative category, for instance, is defined as
follows:
* The employee must be compensated on a salary or fee basis
(as defined in the regulations) at a rate not less than $455 per
week;
* The employees primary duty must be the performance
of office or non-manual work directly related to the management
or general business operations of the employer or the employers
customers; and
* The employees primary duty includes the exercise of
discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of
significance.
These type of vague guidelines open the way for employers to
take billions in wage payments and turn them into profits, simply
by paying their workers on a salaried rather than hourly basis.
The resulting slash in take-home pay will devastate families all
over the United States.
A panel of three high-ranking officials from the Department
of Labor from the Reagan, Bush Sr., and Clinton administrations
released a report highly critical of the new rules. According
to the report, other than the changed threshold for automatic
eligibility, every provision will serve to deny more workers of
overtime protection. More classes of workers, and a greater
proportion of the workforce overall, will be exempt than we believe
the Congress could have originally intended, they wrote.
The Economic Policy Institute estimates that as many as 6 million
workers could lose their right to overtime pay. EPI listed the
following job-types that will likely see the greatest cuts: 1.4
million low-level salaried supervisors, 130,000 chefs and sous-chefs,
160,000 mortgage loan officers, and 900,000 workers with graduate
or college degrees, as well as 90,000 computer employees, funeral
directors, and licensed embalmers who will now be considered professional
employees. Paralegals, nurses, cooks, secretaries, retail clerks,
computer operators, health care contract workers, and non-unionized
support workers could conceivably see their overtime pay cut.
Instead of receiving time and a half for overtime work, many
will now receive their standard base pay, encouraging employers
to keep their workers for many more hours. With overtime pay eliminated,
why should bosses hire two workers for 40 hours eachand
with corresponding benefits for twowhen they can hire one
and work him or her for 80 hours, with the benefit costs for a
single worker?
Already millions of people in the US cannot subsist on a 40-hour
week. A person working full-time earning minimum wage would earn
$10,712 a year, well below the 2003 federal poverty line of $14,824
for a family of three. About 9.9 million workers earn less than
$7 per hour and millions more hover near that rate. The federal
poverty line itself greatly underestimates the amount of money
needed to raise a family, which would more accurately be placed
at around three times the official poverty level.
Since real wages have been pushed down over the past three
decades for a majority of workers, many are forced to compensate
by working overtime and even working multiple jobs. Currently,
time-and-a-half premium pay for overtime work accounts for 25
percent of the income of those who work overtime, averaging about
$161 every week. The amount of working hours put in by American
families has risen 11 percent since 1975, and with this rule change
those hours are set to skyrocket.
Employer organizations greeted the new regulations with a worrisome
glee. The new rules are much clearer, they are updated,
and we hope that they will avoid the lawsuits that have been such
a problem, said J. Craig Shearman, a spokesman for the National
Retail Federation in Washington.
Wendy Wunsh, employment regulation manager for the 185,000-member
Society of Human Resource Management, said, Were excited.
Were thrilled with the fact that [human resources] professionals
will now have a way to determine whos exempt and whos
not exempt [from overtime protections] on a new, modern definition.
There will be a lot less litigation because both employers
and employees will understand the better definitions about who
is exempt for overtime and who is not, she continued.
This claim is unintentionally revealing. There will be less
litigation because the employers who earlier illegally denied
their employees overtime payand accordingly were liable
to lawsuitscan keep the money in their own pockets and rest
assured they will not be held responsible, now that they enjoy
the protection of the new rules.
Other supporters include the 600,000-member National Federation
of Independent Business, the 14,000-member National Association
of Manufacturers, and the 3 million-member United States Chamber
of Commerce.
The Democratic politicians and trade unions have responded
with public denunciations of the attack on overtime, but such
protests are entirely rhetorical. The trade union bureaucrats
refuse to lead any struggle of the working class to defend its
own interests against the attacks by big business. Instead, they
are using the overtime pay issue as yet another reason for politically
subordinating workers to the corporate-controlled Democratic Party.
Democrats in the Senate voted to block the new rules in May
by passing an amendment to a law to ban any reduction in overtime
pay, but the measure was voted down in the Republican-controlled
House, as the Democrats knew it would be. Even if it passed the
House, the Democrats knew Bush could still have vetoed it. Their
effort had little value except to allow them to posture as defenders
of working people, and provide the occasion for a bit of campaign
demagogy from Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry. No one
seriously expects a Kerry administrationor a new, Democratic-controlled
Congressto take any action on the issue.
The AFL-CIO has responded to the attacks on overtime pay and
the 40-hour week by encouraging people to write letters to Bush
and their congressmen. Union functionaries have handed out thousands
of leaflets in this vein. This effort begs the question, however.
If it took massive strikes in the 1930s to win the limited reforms
of the New Deal, how can one take seriously the AFL-CIOs
strategy of defending these gains by writing emails to George
W. Bush?
See Also:
Bush attack on overtime
pay passes House
[29 July 2003]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |