Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

• 

  Chris Hedemark, 6 Aug 1999 @ 2:07pm

  
  

  Contracting

  That is one of the things in favor of contracting. I never work more than 40 hours a week (in fact, I am forbidden to put in overtime). I rarely carry a pager or do any sort of work at home. I never have to travel away from my family. If employees were actually paid for overtime, I think they would find themselves working normal hours more often.
  
  I think in order to protect workers there needs to be a change in legislation for salary workers. Rather than get paid a straight fee for the week, there has to be something to more equitably compensate workers who consistently work greater than 40 hours per week. If the salary is based off of a 40 hour work week, and the worker ACTUALLY puts in about 60 hours per week average, then that worker is entitled to get paid for their extra 20 hours per week IMO.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Mike (profile), 6 Aug 1999 @ 5:06pm

    
    

    Changes to labor laws

    Well, this is a tricky situation. I'm not sure how I feel about it, honestly. In some sense I think the concept of wages per hour are silly. Everyone should be paid by the job, not the time they take to do it. Part of the "job description" or whatever should include completing projects in a reasonable amount of time. Of course, this could lead to overworking individuals, as it currently does. And, of course, it should also have the opposite effect for folks who can finish quickly. Of course, our society seems to think if you're not working all the time you're lazy or a slacker or something. But if we paid someone for their contributions, and they finish early, and you add more "projects" or tasks for them to do, they should demand more wages. Or something like that.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]