SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tejek who wrote (425536)7/11/2003 1:00:46 AM
From: Skywatcher  Read Replies (1) of 769668
 
anyone who DOES HAVE A JOB.....JUST GOT SCREWED BY THE COMPASSIONATE ONE!

House votes to let Bush administration proceed
with revised rules on overtime
Thursday July 10, 8:26 pm ET
By Alan Fram, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House has voted for proposed rules that could stop at least
644,000 white-collar workers from receiving overtime pay,
heeding a White House veto
threat and taking the side of business in its battle against unions.

{of course white collar people that commit heinous crimes against fellow Americans....get OUTTA JAIL cards....
of course they are not FREE....but are bought and paid for with millions in contributions}

Lawmakers voted 213-210 on
Thursday to reject a Democratic
provision that would have derailed
the regulations. Unless Congress
prevents it, the proposed rules could
take effect later this year.

Senate Democrats had been
planning a similar effort to block the
regulations. But with the outcome in
the House vote, a Senate attempt
would seem to be little more than a
political statement.

The House vote was a victory for
President George W. Bush and
Congress' Republican leaders. With
the ranks of jobless Americans
growing, Democrats are hoping to use Bush's stewardship of the still-weak economy in
next year's presidential and congressional elections by arguing that the Republicans
have inadequately protected workers.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said the administration effort showed "a callous
disregard for the millions of workers who depend on that extra income to make ends
meet."

The proposed rules would require overtime -- pay equal to one-and-a-half times the
hourly rate -- for as many as 1.3 million additional low-income workers when they work
more than 40 hours per week, the department said. Democrats did not oppose that
expansion of the number of workers who would get the extra money.

Democrats and unions say at least 8 million white-collar workers now required to get
overtime would lose it due to new definitions of jobs that would be exempt from the extra
pay. The Labor Department says the figure is at least 644,000.


The Democratic provision would have blocked any Labor Department regulations that
would deprive workers of overtime pay they already receive.

"Overtime is not a luxury, it is a necessity for millions of American families," said Rep.
George Miller, one of the amendment's sponsors.

The overtime fight loomed as one of the year's major issues for both labor and
corporate America, and no one was pulling their punches.

Both sides sent lobbyists to the Capitol and barraged lawmakers with phone calls,
e-mails and letters. Both sides promised to include the vote among those they tally at
election time to rate whether legislators are sympathetic to their causes. Among the
groups working the issue were the AFL-CIO, the National Federation of Independent
Business, the National Restaurant Association and the International Union of Police
Associations.

The new rules, proposed in March, would require overtime for workers earning up to
$22,100 a year, up from the current ceiling of $8,060 set in 1975.

Businesses have complained they must pay overtime to already well-paid workers and
are being deluged by lawsuits from workers demanding overtime. Unions say the new
rules would let employers stop paying overtime to workers including licensed practical
nurses, paralegals, chefs, editors and dental hygienists -- though it would not affect
those covered by union contracts.

CC
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext