In May 2016, the Obama Administration announced new regulations that would increase the number of American entitled to receive time-and-a-half overtime pay. Salaried workers who earn up to $46,476 per year are now entitled to earn time-and-a-half pay when they work more than 40 hours per week. The previous regulations, issued in 2004, set the threshold for overtime pay at $23,660. The Labor department estimates that 4.2 million workers will become newly eligible for overtime pay under the new regulations. Proponents argue that the rule is necessary due to inflation and note that only 7% of salaried workers currently qualify for overtime pay in 2015, down sharply from 60% in 1975. Opponents argue that the new rules will hurt employers and incentivize them to cut their employee’s hours.
Yes but only given the current circumstance. We are and should accelerate moving from employee/employer model too a contracter model. Benefits, pensions, etc cause corruption and impede the understanding of the employee.
No, it should not be required but it should be strongly suggested to do. The government should allow companies to decide overtime benefits on its own, but strict guidelines should be drawn to prevent abuse of full-time employees.
Yes, all employees with an annual salary should have a 40 hour/week cap tied to their agreement (hourly its a given). Anything they choose to accept outside that should be compensated well if businesses want to incentivize longer work hours. Too many companies are getting away with overworking and underpaying their employees through the premise of meeting project completion instead of time dedicated.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.