Replies

1. 
   Novy | Jan 04, 2004 03:06am | #1

   Company

   Based on being an employee

   On a hill by the harbour

   
   

   ---

   Edited 1/3/2004 7:06:55 PM ET by NOVY_7

2. 
   IMERC | Jan 04, 2004 03:19am | #2

   Company

    

   Who ever invented work didn't know how to fish....

3. 
   NickNukeEm | Jan 04, 2004 03:24am | #3

   I add a t least 1 hr/day charge for setup, breakdown, cleanup, and other intangibles.  So I guess if I worked for a company, it would be on their time, since I'm being paid for it.

   I never met a tool I didn't like!
1. 
   mmoogie | Jan 04, 2004 05:01am | #4

   I feel that time spent not living my life doing what I choose to do is time I would like to be paid for, since it is time lost to me forever.

   The way I look at it, I should be paid at minimum for all time from the moment I get to the jobsite till I get in the truck and leave. If the job is a long way from home (more than 45 minutes or so) I charge for travel time one way.

   That is my practice as a sole-proprietor working time and materials most of the time.

   I would not work for an emplyer who expected me to set-up, break-down or clean-up for him for free. Just as I would not expect him to pay for my lunch break. Though I would expect a paid 15 minute morning and afternoon break, though I rarely take one in actual practice.

   If I was hiring, I think I would think twice about hiring smokers, because in addition to many other negatives involved, some often stretch the all too frequent smoke break out quite a bit.

   Steve

1. 
   Novy | Jan 04, 2004 05:13am | #5

   My best thinking happens when I smoke ..................On a hill by the harbour

1. 
   reinvent | Jan 04, 2004 04:17pm | #10

   He's thinking "OH S*** IM ON FIRE!!" ;-)

1. 
   m2akita | Jan 04, 2004 08:42pm | #11

   I strongly feel that set up and break down time should be paid.  If your not gonna pay me to put back in my truck tools that I pulled out for the job, then I guess we wont use my tools, and we can all sit around watch nothing get done ( sometimes it may takeme 30' to break down and load everything back up).

    That being said, if you are an employee, and the company starts at 7:00 a.m., you should pretty much be ready to go with your tool belt  at 7:00 a.m..  Ready to go and set the jobsite up, but ready to go.  Key word is pretty much.  Since we are a smaller company, and pretty low key.  Our actual start time will vary.  Sometimes a little earlier, sometimes a little later, hopefully it all balances out in the end.  If we are drastically slow getting moving, I will dock back my time.

   Not sure about travel time.  Thinking that anything over 45 minutes maybe pay for in the morning.  Course that would probably apply to anywhere, every day, in bigger cities like Boston, DC, New York, etc.

   M2akita

   Do I get paid for lunch and breaks if I keep my tool belt on??

2. 
   bstcrpntr | Jan 04, 2004 10:45pm | #12

   gosh i dont want to take over this thread but why the hell does anyone have to stop working to smoke.  If i am framing and in a position where smoking interfears witht the work i dont friggin smoke that simple.  IF there is already paint started in teh house i dotn smoke in it period.   Break time is smoke time it is unfair to think that because you smoke you get extra breaks.  And no walking for a tool is not when you light up till you get back.  That takes longer than smoking the damn thing.

   ooooh yeah  i smoke at least a pack a day so i can b itchAn inch to short.  That's the story of my life !

   bstcrpntr ---   I hope to grow into this name.

3. 
   CarpenterJC | Jan 05, 2004 03:59am | #13

   hmmmm..seems to be alot of concern about smokers...maybe we shouldnt hire any coffee or pop drinkers that take 10 min to run to their trucks for coffee or pop every hour....oh oh wait..I know..lets not hire anybody that has to run and take a piss when theirs not a breaktime either......point is..we ALL fudge time here and their abit....as long as the job gets done the customer is happy and we make money.

                                                                                    JC

    

   yes I smoke..and drink coffee and pop..and actually take a piss on ocassion.

4. 
   Lateapex911 | Jan 06, 2004 06:03am | #14

   My old  boss used to pull silly stuff like that. "Do more so you'll be promoted" and so on. I was salary, and I put in the extra hour. Payback? Same thing the guy who spent half the day in his truck "discussing family business" got. (Which was actually planning is next vacation  or weekend trip!)

   Finally during one meeting where we were discussing the weeks work load, and lot's of things were landing in my lap,  he said, "Some weeks you just gotta go the extra mile", and I said, 'Look , you want me to "Go the extra mile" -fine....but first you come and spend 8 hours a week painting my house until we're even"  He just looked at me kinda queer like.....until I handed him a stack of time sheets showing my shortest week gave him 4 free hours and most were double or triple that.

   In a company where I actually had a shot at the "profit", I can see such a thing, but he wanted us to be salaried to ease bookeeping hassles.Jake Gulick

   [email protected]

   CarriageHouse Design

   Black Rock, CT

5. 
   SHazlett | Jan 06, 2004 06:09pm | #15

   Your post reminds me of an article in this morning newspaper. It seems our " family friendly" republican administration----and their lackeys in the Department of Labor-------are publishing some helpfull pointers to allow employers to avoid paying overtime costs.

   a sample of helpfull hints include "payroll adjustments" such as converting workers annual pay to hourly---then cutting the wage and adding back in overtime to equal the former salary. essentially workers get hosed by working additional hours for the same money.

   those republicans-----always looking for ways to "help" the working man----------------.

6. 
   brownbagg | Jan 08, 2004 04:09pm | #18

   but that salary people, Its alway been that way, salary people do not  get overtime. It has nothing to do with hourly people.

   We charge the customer by the hour so we get paid from time arriving at office to time leaving office. so jobsite get charge travel, breaks, lunch. till time I go home. But I might cover five job in one day.

   The best employee you can have but you wouldn't want him as a neighbor " He the shifty type"

7. 
   SHazlett | Jan 09, 2004 02:30pm | #20

   Actually Brownbagg----unless I am mistaken lower level salaried people ARE to be paid overtime under this NEW arrangement.Any salaried people below a certain pay level are to be paid overtime-----which is why the labor department is suggesting converting them to hourly at a REDUCED pay rate. Remember, Bush said this plan was to help lower level workers?-----looks more like it is designed to help EMPLOYERS.

8. 
   brownbagg | Jan 09, 2004 05:06pm | #21

   yes you right but it help the low salary people by putting them on hours. The low salary work work 30-40 hour at a low salary, by raising the theshold Its cheaper to pay by the hour than salary. Once you on hour you have a whole bunch of laws protection you.

   See at low salary they was nothing that could be done. By making them pay overtime. They are forcing the hand to move them to hours or pay more. So the low paid salary worker is coming out ahead with more money.

   They are telling the employer if you do not want to pay overtime increase the salary to the theshold.

   The best employee you can have but you wouldn't want him as a neighbor " He the shifty type"

9. 
   SHazlett | Jan 09, 2004 06:01pm | #23

   Let's see if i follow you on this Brownbagg.

   according to the department of labor helpfull hints

   If an employer  has a employee with a low salary-----he can now convert the employee to hourly at a LOWER annual rate,

   have the employee work ADDITIONAL hours on overtime untill the combined straight wage plus overtime equals the former annual salary level-------

   and so has extracted additional hours of labor from the employee----but hasn't paid that employee a nickel more-------

   and you somehow think THAT is to the employees advantage? THAT is a family friendly policy?

   Personally i can't see how that benefits anybody besides the employer.

10. 
    BillHartmann | Jan 09, 2004 05:59pm | #22

    Those articles left out one little phrase "other wise quailified". There have been followups that clarified it.

    You could put one of your roofers on salary for $100k a year, rain or shine. And you worked them mover 40 hours in one week and you would be paying overtime.

11. 
    SHazlett | Jan 09, 2004 06:16pm | #24

    Bill,

    sorry but I am not following what you mean----- plus I haven't seen any other articles since the one I read earlier this week.

    PLUS---why on earth would I put a ROOFER on salary at 100K ????? LOL

    I am just commenting on helpfull hints from the government which really seem to penalize the very folks the policy was touted as helping.

    I will admidt that I can't see employees meekly accepting such a conversion------" Let's see---this week I work 40 hours a week on salary---but starting next week my boss wants me to work 45 hours a week on an hourly wage ---but my actual pay check won't increase a nickel?"

12. 
    BillHartmann | Jan 09, 2004 07:43pm | #25

    I had seen one follow on article, but I could not find any online. But the more that I read this the more that I realize how poor a job that the new services have been in reporting this.

    Now I don't know all of the details and remember that they where discussed earlier when the changes where being discussed. I guess one would have to go back and read all of the federal rules to figure it out.

    But from what I have seen it appears to be like publishing a news story that the new codes require all new roofs to be only use class A comp shingles and require all non-complinat roofs to be replaced within 20 years.

    BUT LEAVING OUT THIS PART OF THE CODE - "roofs of inherently non-combustable materials, such as slate, tile, metal, or exclused."

    http://www.courier-journal.com/business/news2004/01/06/biz-6B-overtime06-4513.html

    "Among the options for employers: Cut workers' hourly wages so that regular and overtime pay equal the original salary, or raise salaries to the new $22,100 annual threshold, making them ineligible."

    This is what has been in almost all of the stories that I have read, but out of the 20-30 that I looked at this is the only one that included this part.

    "Under the old rules, an employee could make as little as $155 a week and still be classified as a "professional" or "white-collar" employee, and thus exempt from overtime. The new rules would increase that annual pay rate to $22,100 from $8,060."

    The exception to paying overtime required that they a) be salaried, b) "professional" or "management", c) that they make over $8,060 under the old rules.

    If I remember correctly on of the changes was drastically changing the "professional" and "managment" to current jobs and not what was done in 1938 when the orginal laws where written, but I digress.

    A number of people that did not qualify for overtime under the old rules was "assistant managers" at fast food places. They might have been making $15,000 and working 50hours a week.

    They would now be required to be paid overtime.

    And all the press releasse did was to state the employeers options and in at least this story the salary adjustment was the last option.

    " Employers' options include:

    # Adhering to a 40-hour workweek.

    # Raising salaries to the $22,100 threshold. If employers raise a worker's salary "it means they're getting a raise — that's not a way around overtime," Frank said.

    # Making a "payroll adjustment" that results "in virtually no, or only a minimal increase in labor costs," the department said. Workers' annual pay would be converted to an hourly rate and cut, with overtime added in to equal the former salary."

    Because Prospero would not let me finish what I was writing and had to post and then edit I don't have your orginal message in front of me.

    But you make the comment about don't think that employee's would stand for "adjusting their wage rates for the same pay".

    It depends. For those that don't qualify for making more than $15,000 as an FF asistant manager I don't think that you will see much complaints. Or they will quite their $15,000 salaried job at Burger King and go get an hour job at McDonals.

    The ones that are worth it to the employee will either get their hours cut or their salary boosted.

    Edited 1/9/2004 11:49:02 AM ET by Bill Hartmann

13. 
    SHazlett | Jan 09, 2004 11:07pm | #26

     Bill, what you have quoted sounds like the article I read.

    the part regaurding "payroll adjustment" is what had originally caught my eye----as it seemed most ripe for an employer to manipulate and abuse.

14. 
    BillHartmann | Jan 09, 2004 11:16pm | #27

    "-as it seemed most ripe for an employer to manipulate and abuse."

    Anymore than currently having a $15k assistant manager working 50 hours a week?

4. 
   Gunner | Jan 04, 2004 05:16am | #6

   We get paid for everything. We even get drive time paid both ways, which is rare around her and it's a good thing as somedays we drive four hours each way.

   Who Dares Wins.

1. 
   briank | Jan 04, 2004 05:57am | #7

   I figured that most people would say that it should be on the company--but I have worked for more than one company that wanted you to start setting up 15 minutes early--then you'ld be ready to go when 7:00 rolled around.  Always hated employers who were trying to get something for nothing.  Just like working through lunch--that's fine if indeed you get out 1/2hr early--if not, you're just donating time.

1. 
   bstcrpntr | Jan 04, 2004 07:32am | #8

   As an employee and foreman of a good size crew our policy is this.   I get there and am ready to go about 10 mins early.  That is set up and ready to work.  I get 30 mins overtime a EVERYDAY.  At 3:15 everyone stops working and starts cleaning straighting and putting away things.  If i think it will take longer than 15mins me and one more may start early.An inch to short.  That's the story of my life !

   bstcrpntr ---   I hope to grow into this name.

1. 
   SHazlett | Jan 04, 2004 04:00pm | #9

    when I have employees they are not paid travel time---but they are paid to set up,break down and for morning ,noon and after noon breaks ( which I rarely/never take myself. when the paid breaks(usually lunch0 start getting stretched---then workers start getting docked. I lay out the days work and tell every body--this is what we are doing today---if we get done by 1:00 or 2:00 we are still getting a full days pay---so let's get it done early and well and go home.

   when I worked on a framing crew for a while the hours were from 7:00 untill 4:30. 15 minutes to set up was unpaid, but 15 minutes to break down was PAID. 1/2 hour for lunch was unpaid but 10 minute morning and after noon breaks were paid.------at the time I felt all that was fair and just.

   BTW I do find that I have to ride herd on smokers ( most all of my guys smoke) smokers really feel like they are entitled to stop and take an unscheduled but paid 10 minute smoke break anytime the damn well please---once or twice an hour if you let 'em. ( when I smoked I tried the same thing!)

2. 
   JohnSprung | Jan 07, 2004 11:30pm | #16

   Because of noise laws that required us to be quiet before 7:00 AM, I used to figure out how much time before that I could really use for measuring and marking and such, and arrive at 6:30 or 6:45 depending on what there was to do.  And on the dot of 7:00 I'd make the first saw cut of the day.  But all that setup and wrap time was quite properly company time.

   -- J.S.

5. 
   jonblakemore | Jan 08, 2004 08:54am | #17

   All time on site, other than lunch, is paid.  I don't see why anyone would agree to otherwise.

   I always make sure that my tools are put away before the bosses.  If I have to put everything away where it came from, then I surely am going to do it on company time.  I don't want the boss to be loaded up, pulling out and then wondering why I have an extra 15 minutes on my time card.

    

   Jon Blakemore

6. 
   ravenwind | Jan 09, 2004 07:12am | #19

   I charge from the time i get to the job to when i leave including setup and teardown and clean up and  ive had customers that said leave it (the mess ) and they would clean it up for me to save them money  that way i work a little longer on there dime / fine with me.  I work for myself so its the customer if I worked for some other contractor it would be on his dime.

                                                   woof dogboy

        while were on the subject  when i get money up front for materials and 1/3 labor about 15% goes to misc tools sawblades/drillbits/caulkguns, taping knives,pencils,roll of duct tape etc. = overhead cost

   
   

   ---

   Edited 1/8/2004 11:18:39 PM ET by dogboy

7. 
   WorkshopJon | Jan 09, 2004 11:17pm | #28

   "Who's time is setup/breakdown of tools on the jobsite??"

   Brian,

   If it's an hourly paid employee, it's company time. Period. Now if the worker is a decent guy, he'll show up early and stay a tad late, assuming the employer pays in 15 minute blocks, and by "early and late" I mean less than 15 minutes at each end, not including BS time.

   Jon