
US legislation would eliminate overtime for CS professionals - JoshTriplett
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s112-1747
======
jmcguckin
So? Most IT staff (certainly programmers, etc) are classified as EXEMPT and
don't qualify for overtime anyway.

~~~
krobertson
Every full time position I've had has been exempt... I've never gotten
overtime.

------
pnathan
I don't understand the legislation's effects. Would this eliminate paid
overtime? Unpaid overtime? How would this affect salarymen?

------
malkia
Since I started working as game developer, crunch has been always around. I
won't comment on whether it's good or bad, whether it should be paid or not.
Just this:

If you have worked more than 12 hours, and sometimes 20 - how the fuck one
drives 20 miles back home? I have a friend (also game developer) who rides
from Santa Monica down to Carlsbad every day - ~100miles each direction. And
they had to crunch a lot.

Hopefully for me, and everyone around I'm just a mile away from work...

~~~
potatolicious
Yeah, I have concerns about this also. At work we're crunching towards a
release for the past few days. Last night I stumbled home on the train at
11pm, my brain was completely shattered. I couldn't even parse sentences from
the book I carry around for the commute.

How people are able to drive themselves home safely in this condition is
beyond me.

~~~
falcolas
Hopefully it will simply result in fewer crunches. When forced to choose
between pushing a deadline, or paying overtime to programmers, I imagine most
employers will lean towards pushing.

I think it will have the most impact on startups where perpetual crunch is
closer to the cultural norm, instead of the outlier. Any thoughts on this?

~~~
malkia
Maybe I misread the bill, but isn't the bill saying no overtime payment for
anyone getting 27.63/hr? That used to be $41.00/hr for California in 2001
(probably was $47/hr last year).

------
marssaxman
US business practice eliminated overtime for CS professionals decades ago.
What is the point of this proposed legislation?

Hours mean nothing; complex problem solving happens on a background thread
anyway. A well-managed CS organization demands overtime rarely or never.

------
tadglines
The last part of (a)(17) was changed from:

who, in the case of an employee who is compensated on an hourly basis, is
compensated at a rate of not less than $27.63 an hour.

to:

who is compensated at an hourly rate of not less than $27.63 an hour or who is
paid on a salary basis at a salary level as set forth by the Department of
Labor in part 541 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations. An employee
described in this paragraph shall be considered an employee in a professional
capacity pursuant to paragraph (1).

The law as currently stated implies that a non-hourly worker (i.e. salary) is
also considered exempt regardless of their efective hourly pay rate.

The proposed change just makes this explicit and clarifies that to be
considered as a salaried employee, the person must be paid a minimum of $455 a
week (see TITLE 29 541.600(a)).

This change effectively reduces the effective hourly rate from $27.63 to
$11.38 ($455 * 52 / 2080).

------
tlb
"hourly rate of not less than $27.63". Why hasn't the gov't figured out
inflation adjustment yet? Laws are supposed to make sense indefinitely. In 30
years, that may be less than the minimum wage.

~~~
smackfu
Fun fact: it used to be codified as 6.5 times minimum wage, but was changed in
1996 to be fixed at 6.5x the current minimum wage of $4.25, which is why it is
such a random seeming number. If the law had not been changed in 1996, the
current value would be $47.12 per hour, which would exclude many more hourly
workers.

<http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c101:S.2930.ENR:/>

------
deskamess
Question... why are such exemptions legal? I understand that it is codified in
law, and hence "legal" but why is the underlying law not considered
discriminatory to deny someone overtime based on their existing salary and or
job classification?

~~~
jaylevitt
I think the original idea of exempt employees was that you were paid for your
work, not your hours. There was a trade-off; you couldn't be required to work
a certain shift, but neither would you be paid for being present for longer
than your shift.

In reality, of course, this often leads to the expectation of longer hours,
because why not.

------
moocow01
99% of the time if you work almost anywhere in the core business of software
in Calfornia or the US you will never see a dime in overtime pay. I don't
think too many folks consider overtime pay but when/if you have friends or
family who are lucky enough to be in a profession where overtime is granted
you'll realize that we are missing out a bit in our profession on this one.
(Granted there are many other exempt professions as well.) After getting run
through a few death marches over the years, I now work 9-5, politely decline
pressure to stay late, and go home being that I'm not paid overtime to stay.
(Note that I don't work for a startup and am trying to moonlight so those free
hours matter a lot to me) Ive also learned that pressure to stay all the time
is usually an indicator that something is going wrong in the business.

------
yariang
I don't understand this. Which part of the linked page outlaws paid over time?
As a college student I don't have a lot of experience a) reading legalese and
b) with getting paid.

Also, what are the benefits of laws that outlaw overtime? Is it a form of
income redistribution? Why computer professionals specifically? Is it because
the jobs are not physical and overtime is thus supposedly less taxing?

~~~
tadglines
The change doesn't outlaw paid overtime. The law, as written, exempts an
employer from paying overtime if the employee is an executive, administrative
or professional employee.

If an employee cannot be considered exempt (under the law) then it is illegal
for an employer to NOT pay overtime.

The change (as proposed in the link) would appear to make it so that an
employer could include more of their IT staff in the EXEMPT category.

------
mindstab
In BC Canada this happened in about 2001 as a parting "gift" from of all
parties, our departing left pro union and worker New Democrat Party.

~~~
nobody314159265
But in Canada software engineers aren't professionals - because they aren't
engineers!

That's why in spite of my Oxbridge PhD I'm not an exempt employee, have to
belong to the union (teamsters) and can't supervise anybody. While a 21year
old 'environmental-engineering' grad is exempt

~~~
minsight
It's illegal to refer to yourself as an engineer in Canada unless you have an
Engineering degree/are certified by the appropriate professional organization.

~~~
nobody314159265
I don't mind that - I object to that it's ONLY engineers that are
'professional', science PhD = janitor.

In fact I don't think engineers should be allowed to use any of mechanics,
statics, thermodynamics, solid state electronics, etc without getting a
professional physicist to approve it.

~~~
potatolicious
Uh... I'm having trouble grasping what you're getting at.

The only limitation to having an engineering degree vs. not is whether or not
you can legally call yourself an "engineer". It makes no difference in any
other respect - there are *plenty of software engineers in Canada who do the
exact same job without the title.

There is no legal prohibition against you performing engineering work - anyone
is allowed to engineer (the verb), but not everyone is an engineer (the noun).

There's also no classification difference merely based on what degree you
have. The word "professional" AFAIK has no legal meaning, in Canada, in the
context you're talking about.

Engineering is considered a professional degree - but that has no bearing on
whether or not you're allowed to be hired into an engineering position, or
have to join a union, etc etc.

~~~
nobody314159265
Many companies and ALL government jobs segregate on professional or union.
Since the only profession they admit is engineer - anyone technical, however
well qualified, who is not an engineer is treated the same as the janitor.

------
ryanhuff
How does this impact California? I understand that they have their own law
related to IT staff.

------
ianloic
If we had a union for software engineers they'd be lobbying against this.

------
fungi
never been a better time to move to australia :)

~~~
hartror
I second this sentiment but perhaps for not the same reasons.

I work as a programming contractor on short term (3-6 month) jobs and right
now the job market in Australia (Melbourne specifically) for coders with a
demonstrable track record is fantastic.

~~~
Merik
as a local melbourne programmer (american expat), I'm curious how you land
your contracts. I currently work for a small interactive media company, who
sub contract to me. Im happy with our relationship but id like to find a
second source of projects when they don't fill my time. Also, do you mind
sharing what you think a fair rate is these days? (100/hr)? id love to pm you
but hn seems to lack that feature.

~~~
hartror
So far they've all been through job postings on local user groups or contacts.
I've poked around Seek a bit but not had to apply for any there as yet.

The rate all depends on what you are doing and what your experience is.

------
ahoyhere
The bill doesn't appear to "eliminate overtime" but "eliminate the requirement
to pay overtime rates for overtime work." In which case there is no change
since pretty much everybody already earned too much to qualify for overtime
pay anyway.

As if the US govt would pass a law protecting workers. It is to laugh.

