but there seems to be more complications to this.... (as usual with "compassionate" conservative bills (ala the Medicare hoax).... I do know that the nurses are upset... as they will lose the ability to earn overtime. And folks, what this country really needs is MORE nurses -- and nurses who love their jobs and are rewarded. I think the main reason we had over 90,000 medical mistakes in one year in hospitals (according to the National Consumers League) is because the Registered Nurses have been reduced in order to "save money" and increase shareholder value for hospitals as big business rather than care-givers.
It is very infomative. I don't believe that any pay raise will take place in order to cover up the loss of time and a half. The state that I live in already suffers from low paid employee's. I can't imagine that changing any time soon. After all, we have a deficit to fix first. The President has gotten on my last nerve.
messengers are the first to go down when facing tyrants...hehehehehe
posted by
sunfever
on
September 8, 2004
at
9:15 AM
| |
reply
hmmmm...heel
personally i think the rightists and leftistis aka conservatives and liberals is a crock load of crap shat out to justify stupidity as brains...bottom line for all governance is this: r u providing a stable productive environment for your constituents to grow? on that baseline - no governemnt on our planet delivers
in any case the rich are lining their pockets at the expense of the poor, middle class is glorified poverty - u earn the right to live in airconditioned comfort and drive a plush car if u pay your taxes and mortgage yr ass to the hilt, so even if 2 million workers have their pay upgrade compensate for the loss of overtime am wondering about the remaining 398 mil (the us pop is somewhere around 400mil right?) AND will the pay upgrade equal if not exceed their OT? i think not...
it is scary to watch a government give in to big business without considering the fallout for the least of its constituents (once upon a time america used to care) like a whore spreadin her legs and cheerfully yelling "plow in fellas" while she drools at the change accumulating on her sidetable. the risk in ignoring this is that we fall for penis envy and subscribe to every shaman potion to get a dick as big, that can fuck aunty samantha (unk sam's wife) to get that promised orgasm of your life...
posted by
sunfever
on
September 8, 2004
at
9:05 AM
| |
reply
sunfever...
...the short answer is 'no'!
Sadly, the consumer culture has molly-coddled us into a state of comfy acceptance. There should be a revolution - a kid ye not! - but there won't be because most people (myself included, I reckon) in the greedy West are just too sorted with creature comforts to be arsed to go out and man the barricades, bring down a corrupt government, sweep the whole shoddy mess away and get back to something REAL.
But you're right. Given time, it will surely implode, as every system and empire has since time began. The big difference this time, of course, is this one could take our pleasantly habitable planet with it.
Thanks for stopping by.
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on
September 8, 2004
at
8:48 AM
| |
reply
heel...
...trying to pass off liberal bias as news?
Wow!
Just as well the right wing fundamentalist crowd never try that trick, huh?
Ah. Wait. Who said "Fox News"?
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on
September 8, 2004
at
8:44 AM
| |
reply
Yeah,
If two million workers are losing their overtime pay, it is because they are having their base pay bumped, in some cases significantly. The numbers can be spun any way you'd like. The Dept. of Labor could just as easily say, "Two million workers will see an increase in their base pay."
The "lettuce" manager assertion is fallacy, however, no matter how it is spun. It was a fact-less, dishonest attempt by a propagandist trying to pass off liberal bias as news. Again.
posted by
heel
on
September 8, 2004
at
8:30 AM
| |
reply
Are we really so fucking powerless?
If Bush is slashing worker benefits, ensuring the rich get richer and the poor poorer, why the fuck is he still in power and why is he leading in the polls?
next thing u know they will be stripping worker rights in asia - will say america has done it so can we...no fuckin way...sigh...guess have a few more years before we go to the mattresses...
the motherfuckers dare dream that they can get away it eh? on god's own planet?
i guess it will have to run its course, an economic model that will cave in under its own inbreeding of greed, corruption and the 'keep my balls' safe in pierre cardin underwear...the collapse of rome was similar...
posted by
sunfever
on
September 8, 2004
at
8:28 AM
| |
reply
ExStud...
...you're right there!
Check out the very first post in this blog (down the bottom of page 8) and yopu'll see some instructive data on how companies are definitely not sharing their wealth equitably - and the situation is worsening year on year.
Thanks for stopping by.
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on
September 8, 2004
at
3:24 AM
| |
reply
Heel...
...I checked in with Greg and he tells me, through his research, that...
"In the Federal Register, Bush's own DOL estimates over 2 million workers will lose overtime pay. And where's the 'family friendly' comp time?"
I guess that ends our discussion?
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on
September 8, 2004
at
3:20 AM
| |
reply
Perhaps the more important issue is not whether this new regulation does or
does not cut overtime pay, but whether regular wages are sufficient in the first place. Most employees in labor markets whose incomes place them among what is called the working poor would probably believe (and justifiably so) that their company's profits are not being fairly distributed to unskilled workers. Ergo, that they should be paid more. I can see no better solution to this problem than for workers to unionize and make demands. Not an original solution, but a time tested one...
posted by
Dylan24
on
September 7, 2004
at
6:25 PM
| |
reply
Greg Palast...
...is an award-winning journalist who writes for the Observer, the Guardian, and makes documentaries for the BBC.
I'm not prepared to defend or deny what he has written. I just found it an interesting take on yet another dodgy move by Bush.
It is your right to claim the information in this post is false. And it is Greg's right to claim otherwise.
Me? I'm just passing on the word.
Thanks for reading.
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on
September 7, 2004
at
8:48 AM
| |
reply
I'm paid for true stories, non-fiction
Unlike Greg Palast. Are you denying what you have posted is false?
posted by
heel
on
September 7, 2004
at
6:03 AM
| |
reply
I Was Interested...
...to note that your Primary Occupation is listed as "storyteller" ;-)
Thanks for reading.
D
posted by
DamonLeigh
on
September 7, 2004
at
5:57 AM
| |
reply
As usual ...
Missing from a liberal's assertions are those pesky little things known as facts.
The Aug. 23 amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act provides that employees who make less than $23,660 a year or $455 a week must be paid time-and-a-half for hours worked more than 40 per week. Those dollar figures seem pretty low, right?
Well, in regard to overtime pay, the FLSA hadn't been updated since 1949. Employers had been allowed to withold overtime pay for anyone earning less than $8,060 a year or $155 a week!
"Nevertheless, workers getting their pay snipped shouldn't complain, because they will all be receiving promotions. These employees will be re-classified as managers exempt from the law. The change is promoted by the National Council of Chain Restaurants. You've met these 'managers' - they're the ones in the beanies and aprons whose management decisions are, "Hold the lettuce on that."
This is simply not true.
All managers are NOT exempt from the law. They would have to be salaried professionals-- not hourly wage earners -- and are still subject to the $23,660 or $455 guidelines. The law has strict definitions of "professional," and strictly probihits mere job titles from determining exemption status.
This update to the FSLA benefits the portion of the population the Democrats say need the most benefit: the lower income wage-earners. Yet, they are complaining again.
To post this blatantly false information was irresponsible.
posted by
heel
on
September 7, 2004
at
4:55 AM
| |
reply
Copy (or write down) this comment's web address (URL), which is:
Next, go to the email or web page where you want to link to this comment, and paste
(or type) the web address.
