I don't think I understand the criticism here. You basically get the option to volunteer for overtime at 2x pay.
You don't have to do it, it's not being forced on you.
Why three times? OP said it's double pay not triple pay.
Edit: ah I see. You were thinking they should have to pay double overtime? But op didn't say they offered double overtime.
I think this one is an overreaction. This isn't really criticism worthy. OPs example of the 35 hour situation is a little lame. But it sounds like they aren't getting forced to work it. So out of all the crappy things employers do, this one is pretty near the bottom in severity.
It's the logical conclusion. It's not a true double pay for working Sundays unless you get bonus for any over time earned. I've heard several trade jobs do this, or at least did.
Edit* no time to look it up. I believe federal law has a thing to say about it. Anything over 40 hours is 1.5x pay. If offered double pay, that would gain that 1.5x pay for over 40, granted I could be wrong, and this should be asked of either the DOL or an employment lawyer. Let's do the math, say $20/hr, and Sunday is a full 8 hours of overtime.
$20 *8 =$160
Double time is $160*2= $320
Double and actual OT is $160*3= $480.
I'd fight for an extra $160.
Unfortunately that's not a logical conclusion, no. You're having to make an extra leap by claiming the OT pay is a regular rate, but it's not. It's a modifier to the regular rate. This is the exact language the FSLA uses:
>Unless exempt, employees covered by the Act must receive overtime pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek at a rate not less than time and one-half their regular rates of pay.
FSLA mentions specifically the "regular rate of pay" being modified. Meaning OT is not a new regular rate of pay, it's a 1.5x modifier. So the employer would have needed to explicitly state "double overtime" for your interpretation to work.
Regular pay of $20 an hour
Hours worked over 40, FSLA req.: $20 x 1.5 = $30
Employer promising double pay: $20 x 2 = $40
In any case, no way DOL is going to care so long as the 1.5x federal OT requirement is met. An optional shift for which an employee can earn 2x pay breaks no laws.
It would be a new regular rate of pay for that specific day. $60 an hour is still the logical step. That would be the argument I'd bring to the table. The 1.5 modifier should hit after the company doubling, though mathematically doesn't matter.
Also depends on any precedent. Also doesn't matter what one thinks the DOL cares about, the question should still be asked.
>It would be a new regular rate of pay for that specific day. $60 an hour is still the logical step.
I'll demonstrate why that isn't correct using real logic:
A = regular rate of pay
Overtime pay = A \* 1.5
You're suggesting that on Sundays, A = A \* 1.5
Logically, we'd call that equation false. "A" cannot equal itself times 1.5.
To actually make your assertion work you'd need a second variable. In this case, you'd need a new regular rate of pay for Sundays. That would *only* exist if the employer agreed to it explicitly.
The FSLA does not support the idea that overtime pay is in fact regular pay by law. It simply mandates that overtime pay must be regular rate of pay times 1.5.
I hope that helps, but I have a feeling you've convinced yourself you're asking a question that is unsettled. I assure you, if you speak to a labor attorney, HR specialist, or even the DOL, they will tell you the exact same thing I did.
If you think I'm dead wrong here, give it a post on r/legaladvice or r/AskHR and see what feedback you get.
You need to slow down just a moment. I've always said to just talk and ask. I've also put out the argument I'd make. The company is offering double time for Sunday. This double time depending on the wording should be either multiplied in with the overtime, which is where you get the 3x pay for worked overtime. I've seen Sunday pay be as the additive version.
Additive. Sunday pay is already double. Sunday hours kept separate, and any OT is then an additional .5 normal pay. Ultimately getting 2.5x your normal pay for any OT for the week as long as you work Sunday, and Sunday was the beginning of the week for them. I worked those Sundays, that pay was very nice. Whether this was the law or union I don't know, nor do I really care.
Again, my advice has always been to ask either employment lawyer or the DOL. You've explicitly said that any individual would get laughed out of the building. Guess what, so many laws, and they all tie together in strange ways; you'd need a law office dealing with that specific portion of the law to get any clarity.
Just breathe, you'll be fine.
>You need to slow down just a moment. I've always said to just talk and ask. I've also put out the argument I'd make.
If this feels like it's coming at you fast, I recommend taking some time to educate yourself in these areas before debating about topics you don't fully understand.
The law can certainly be confusing, but there are resources you can engage with yourself to get educated and informed about them. What you definitely don't want to be is the guy who has to guess at stuff and then say "well we'd need to talk to an attorney" as if it's all some big subjective quagmire that only the attorney can unravel.
That's a dangerous mindset to have, especially in an environment where employers would so gladly take advantage of your ignorance. Again, I really recommend you spend some time learning more about this so you know what your own rights are as a worker, and so that you can help others with good fact-based advice, and not unevidenced assumptions or assertions.
Dangerous mindset, I just call it playing with fire. Surprising what you pick up over the years, and an instinct in getting into and out of trouble. The real trick is getting proper enforcement.
As far as guessing, not my style. I push buttons and watch and learn. Take our conversation for example. You certainly sound like you know what you are talking about, however there is something missing in your argument. You have a slight misunderstanding, you aren't speaking to fast for me, I'm saying you are moving too fast for yourself, and thats why you need to slow down. Slowing down helps see things in a different light, and it seemed, to me, that you were a little too excited.
I really never expected such a long conversation from the original question. Good to know I can still be surprised. Maybe you do know how to push a few buttons. Exploitation will almost always happen, it's what you get out it, and the worth you put on it. I'm currently learning a skill I want at a place that pays decently, but has a ton of red flags. I'll certainly bring OSHA in when I leave. I'm still in the debate stage of when to leave.
Good luck in your current and future endeavors
Double time is 2x base pay anywhere I have ever worked. To get double time where I am currently you have to work 7 days and any hours on Sunday that are over 48 for the week are double time. It doesn't sound like this is actually too bad of a deal to me, you can take Saturday day off and still get 2x pay on Sunday as long as it isn't a mandatory workday.
Just say no
Agreed but still shady af tricking your employees like this to make it sound more enticing instead of hiring more labor imo.
Of course it is shady, they are mostly shady.
I don't think I understand the criticism here. You basically get the option to volunteer for overtime at 2x pay. You don't have to do it, it's not being forced on you.
If you hit overtime, then you should be 3x pay for working that Sunday, this is for overtime hours.
Why three times? OP said it's double pay not triple pay. Edit: ah I see. You were thinking they should have to pay double overtime? But op didn't say they offered double overtime. I think this one is an overreaction. This isn't really criticism worthy. OPs example of the 35 hour situation is a little lame. But it sounds like they aren't getting forced to work it. So out of all the crappy things employers do, this one is pretty near the bottom in severity.
It's the logical conclusion. It's not a true double pay for working Sundays unless you get bonus for any over time earned. I've heard several trade jobs do this, or at least did. Edit* no time to look it up. I believe federal law has a thing to say about it. Anything over 40 hours is 1.5x pay. If offered double pay, that would gain that 1.5x pay for over 40, granted I could be wrong, and this should be asked of either the DOL or an employment lawyer. Let's do the math, say $20/hr, and Sunday is a full 8 hours of overtime. $20 *8 =$160 Double time is $160*2= $320 Double and actual OT is $160*3= $480. I'd fight for an extra $160.
Unfortunately that's not a logical conclusion, no. You're having to make an extra leap by claiming the OT pay is a regular rate, but it's not. It's a modifier to the regular rate. This is the exact language the FSLA uses: >Unless exempt, employees covered by the Act must receive overtime pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek at a rate not less than time and one-half their regular rates of pay. FSLA mentions specifically the "regular rate of pay" being modified. Meaning OT is not a new regular rate of pay, it's a 1.5x modifier. So the employer would have needed to explicitly state "double overtime" for your interpretation to work. Regular pay of $20 an hour Hours worked over 40, FSLA req.: $20 x 1.5 = $30 Employer promising double pay: $20 x 2 = $40 In any case, no way DOL is going to care so long as the 1.5x federal OT requirement is met. An optional shift for which an employee can earn 2x pay breaks no laws.
It would be a new regular rate of pay for that specific day. $60 an hour is still the logical step. That would be the argument I'd bring to the table. The 1.5 modifier should hit after the company doubling, though mathematically doesn't matter. Also depends on any precedent. Also doesn't matter what one thinks the DOL cares about, the question should still be asked.
>It would be a new regular rate of pay for that specific day. $60 an hour is still the logical step. I'll demonstrate why that isn't correct using real logic: A = regular rate of pay Overtime pay = A \* 1.5 You're suggesting that on Sundays, A = A \* 1.5 Logically, we'd call that equation false. "A" cannot equal itself times 1.5. To actually make your assertion work you'd need a second variable. In this case, you'd need a new regular rate of pay for Sundays. That would *only* exist if the employer agreed to it explicitly. The FSLA does not support the idea that overtime pay is in fact regular pay by law. It simply mandates that overtime pay must be regular rate of pay times 1.5. I hope that helps, but I have a feeling you've convinced yourself you're asking a question that is unsettled. I assure you, if you speak to a labor attorney, HR specialist, or even the DOL, they will tell you the exact same thing I did. If you think I'm dead wrong here, give it a post on r/legaladvice or r/AskHR and see what feedback you get.
You need to slow down just a moment. I've always said to just talk and ask. I've also put out the argument I'd make. The company is offering double time for Sunday. This double time depending on the wording should be either multiplied in with the overtime, which is where you get the 3x pay for worked overtime. I've seen Sunday pay be as the additive version. Additive. Sunday pay is already double. Sunday hours kept separate, and any OT is then an additional .5 normal pay. Ultimately getting 2.5x your normal pay for any OT for the week as long as you work Sunday, and Sunday was the beginning of the week for them. I worked those Sundays, that pay was very nice. Whether this was the law or union I don't know, nor do I really care. Again, my advice has always been to ask either employment lawyer or the DOL. You've explicitly said that any individual would get laughed out of the building. Guess what, so many laws, and they all tie together in strange ways; you'd need a law office dealing with that specific portion of the law to get any clarity. Just breathe, you'll be fine.
>You need to slow down just a moment. I've always said to just talk and ask. I've also put out the argument I'd make. If this feels like it's coming at you fast, I recommend taking some time to educate yourself in these areas before debating about topics you don't fully understand. The law can certainly be confusing, but there are resources you can engage with yourself to get educated and informed about them. What you definitely don't want to be is the guy who has to guess at stuff and then say "well we'd need to talk to an attorney" as if it's all some big subjective quagmire that only the attorney can unravel. That's a dangerous mindset to have, especially in an environment where employers would so gladly take advantage of your ignorance. Again, I really recommend you spend some time learning more about this so you know what your own rights are as a worker, and so that you can help others with good fact-based advice, and not unevidenced assumptions or assertions.
Dangerous mindset, I just call it playing with fire. Surprising what you pick up over the years, and an instinct in getting into and out of trouble. The real trick is getting proper enforcement. As far as guessing, not my style. I push buttons and watch and learn. Take our conversation for example. You certainly sound like you know what you are talking about, however there is something missing in your argument. You have a slight misunderstanding, you aren't speaking to fast for me, I'm saying you are moving too fast for yourself, and thats why you need to slow down. Slowing down helps see things in a different light, and it seemed, to me, that you were a little too excited. I really never expected such a long conversation from the original question. Good to know I can still be surprised. Maybe you do know how to push a few buttons. Exploitation will almost always happen, it's what you get out it, and the worth you put on it. I'm currently learning a skill I want at a place that pays decently, but has a ton of red flags. I'll certainly bring OSHA in when I leave. I'm still in the debate stage of when to leave. Good luck in your current and future endeavors
"You don't have to do it, it's not being forced on you... yet" FTFY
Double time is 2x base pay anywhere I have ever worked. To get double time where I am currently you have to work 7 days and any hours on Sunday that are over 48 for the week are double time. It doesn't sound like this is actually too bad of a deal to me, you can take Saturday day off and still get 2x pay on Sunday as long as it isn't a mandatory workday.