Cantor will propose Federal Law that ...
Bushwhacker

Minneapolis, MN

#24 Feb 27, 2013
Slewsie dear, how come you don't get paid overtime to be on Topix 18 hours a day / 7 days a week? Don't you think that is almost as bad as the screw job you got at the Post Office when you got fired from there?
Bushwhacked

Kent, WA

#25 Feb 27, 2013
Same guy who HATES working poor, now wants to do them a "favor" and let them work without OT, so they can take the "regular" time hours off ??Hmmm !!

So, you're "letting" poor folks work 16 hours today, then stay home tomorrow, rather than paying time & 1/2 ?? Sweet,(SARCASM) I see no problems with ridiculous hours and lower paychecks !!!
ist

Duluth, MN

#26 Feb 28, 2013
Bushwhacked wrote:
Same guy who HATES working poor, now wants to do them a "favor" and let them work without OT, so they can take the "regular" time hours off ??Hmmm !!
So, you're "letting" poor folks work 16 hours today, then stay home tomorrow, rather than paying time & 1/2 ?? Sweet,(SARCASM) I see no problems with ridiculous hours and lower paychecks !!!
You are everything that is wrong with America. You completely ignore fact and logic in favor of vitriolic demagogy. You are an unwitting shill. You would be supporting this plan if different people offered it or if your liberal web blog supported it. You are an embarrassment. I hope other countries aren't reading these threads.

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#27 Feb 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the speech reading comprehension challenged poster, he proposes giving the workers the ability to choose to work comp time to use for time off later.
Union shill.
In the private sector, employees and employers can usually work something out. I guess I don't see the need for yet another regulation at the federal level.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#28 Feb 28, 2013
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
In the private sector, employees and employers can usually work something out. I guess I don't see the need for yet another regulation at the federal level.
I think it has to do with private sector union work rules. Non-unionized shops aren't as big of a problem. If the workers choose time off instead of overtime pay, the union loses revenue.
Bushwhacked

Kent, WA

#29 Feb 28, 2013
Unions charge dues based on base pay, you're such a complete moron..... Nice you want to "give" folks brutally long shifts and compensate them with no money and time to be exhausted...

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#30 Feb 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>I think it has to do with private sector union work rules. Non-unionized shops aren't as big of a problem. If the workers choose time off instead of overtime pay, the union loses revenue.
Whaaattt?? The almighty unions are not looking out for the best interests of their members and their children? Say it ain't so!
The Truth

Saint Paul, MN

#31 Feb 28, 2013
It isn't the matter of a choice, Bozo, it is a matter of the employer insisting on comp time rather than overtime once the FSLA is repealed.

Are you really dumb enough to think that Cantor is doing this to help the little guy out? Of cource not, he's doing this because big business is pushing him to.

This doesn't have a chance in hell of actually passing. You are wasting your breath.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#32 Feb 28, 2013
Bushwhacked wrote:
Unions charge dues based on base pay, you're such a complete moron..... Nice you want to "give" folks brutally long shifts and compensate them with no money and time to be exhausted...
Nice "facts" you post about Cantor's speech, reading comprehension challenged poster. Many private sector unions get a percentage of the base pay of every hour worked, overtime or not, meaning more paid hours, more union dues collected. Additionally, more money collected, more money put aside in funds the union controls, 401k's, pensions, etc. The UAW bought a championship golf course with their members retirement fund. It has lost a boatload of value and money.
Bushwhacked

Kent, WA

#33 Feb 28, 2013
Same old fool, who said the SEIU #26 janitors would be replaced... Nice "batty" average, senile cantgetitup coot ~!!! LMAOROTFU~!

Unions charge dues based on base pay, you're such a complete moron..... Nice you want to "give" folks brutally long shifts and compensate them with no money and time to be exhausted...
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#34 Feb 28, 2013
Bushwhacked wrote:
Same old fool, who said the SEIU #26 janitors would be replaced... Nice "batty" average, senile cantgetitup coot ~!!! LMAOROTFU~!
Unions charge dues based on base pay, you're such a complete moron..... Nice you want to "give" folks brutally long shifts and compensate them with no money and time to be exhausted...
Integrity challenged, low reading comprehension poster, here is the excerpt from Cantor's speech that you and your ilk are twisting:

Yet today, the federal government has a patchwork of over 47 different overlapping programs that are not dynamic or innovative enough to meet the needs of employers or potential employees. We can fix this, and we should be able to muster bipartisan support to do so.

If you’re a working parent, you know there’s hardly ever enough time at home to be with the kids. Too many parents have to weigh whether they can afford to miss work even for half a day to see their child off on the first day of school or attend a parent-teacher conference.

Federal laws dating back to the 1930s make it harder for parents who hold hourly jobs to balance the demands of work and home. An hourly employee cannot convert previous overtime into future comp-time or flex-time. In 1985, Congress passed a law that gave state and municipal employees this flexibility, but today still denies that same privilege to the entire private sector. That’s not right.

There’s a police officer at home in my district, her name is Vicki. She is working a tough job, with long hours, while raising her children. Her life is made a little easier because as a local government employee, she is permitted to work some extra hours and save it up for a sick day or a school event.

Imagine if we simply chose to give all employees and employers this option. A working mom could work overtime this month and use it as time off next month without having to worry about whether she’ll be able to take home enough money to pay the rent. This is the kind of common sense legislation that should be non-controversial and moves us in the right direction to help make life work for families.

Read the whole speech here.....

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/281203-text ...-
non-starter is a toidi

Saint Paul, MN

#35 Feb 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>Nice "facts" you post about Cantor's speech, reading comprehension challenged poster. Many private sector unions get a percentage of the base pay of every hour worked, overtime or not, meaning more paid hours, more union dues collected. Additionally, more money collected, more money put aside in funds the union controls, 401k's, pensions, etc. The UAW bought a championship golf course with their members retirement fund. It has lost a boatload of value and money.
Oh, so now you admit that your REAL agenda to to try to screw unions, not give workers more flexibility.

ROFLMAO!!!!

You Republicans will do ANYTHING to decrease the pay of the middle and lower class worker.
redeemer

Minneapolis, MN

#36 Feb 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>Nice "facts" you post about Cantor's speech, reading comprehension challenged poster. Many private sector unions get a percentage of the base pay of every hour worked, overtime or not, meaning more paid hours, more union dues collected. Additionally, more money collected, more money put aside in funds the union controls, 401k's, pensions, etc. The UAW bought a championship golf course with their members retirement fund. It has lost a boatload of value and money.
What union did you belong too?unions dues are one base rate.
Bushwhacked

Kent, WA

#37 Feb 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>Integrity challenged, low reading comprehension poster, here is the excerpt from Cantor's speech that you and your ilk are twisting:
Yet today, the federal government has a patchwork of over 47 different overlapping programs that are not dynamic or innovative enough to meet the needs of employers or potential employees. We can fix this, and we should be able to muster bipartisan support to do so.
If you’re a working parent, you know there’s hardly ever enough time at home to be with the kids. Too many parents have to weigh whether they can afford to miss work even for half a day to see their child off on the first day of school or attend a parent-teacher conference.
Federal laws dating back to the 1930s make it harder for parents who hold hourly jobs to balance the demands of work and home. An hourly employee cannot convert previous overtime into future comp-time or flex-time. In 1985, Congress passed a law that gave state and municipal employees this flexibility, but today still denies that same privilege to the entire private sector. That’s not right.
There’s a police officer at home in my district, her name is Vicki. She is working a tough job, with long hours, while raising her children. Her life is made a little easier because as a local government employee, she is permitted to work some extra hours and save it up for a sick day or a school event.
Imagine if we simply chose to give all employees and employers this option. A working mom could work overtime this month and use it as time off next month without having to worry about whether she’ll be able to take home enough money to pay the rent. This is the kind of common sense legislation that should be non-controversial and moves us in the right direction to help make life work for families.
Read the whole speech here.....
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/281203-text ...-
Read the line where it says, "...meet the needs of employers or potential employees..". That line is TOTAL BS !!! The employer need to maximize profit AT the employees expense. QUIT LYING !!!!

You're the anti-union POS liar, who supports corporate greed and insults like a 6 year old...

non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#38 Feb 28, 2013
non-starter is a toidi wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so now you admit that your REAL agenda to to try to screw unions, not give workers more flexibility.
ROFLMAO!!!!
You Republicans will do ANYTHING to decrease the pay of the middle and lower class worker.
Has nothing to do with screwing anybody, your goal is to make workers less able to spend time off with their families, right?
The Truth

Saint Paul, MN

#39 Feb 28, 2013
Quote: "Imagine if we simply chose to give all employees and employers this option. A working mom could work overtime this month and use it as time off next month without having to worry about whether she’ll be able to take home enough money to pay the rent."

Again, this time the applicable part: "Imagine if we simply chose to give all employers this option"

If employers had that options they would save BILLIONS - instead of paying time and a half for overtime, they would FORCE the employee to take comp time off during slow periods!

This benefits employers mostly, not employees.

What kind of idiot believes that Cantor would propose this to help poor single mothers - the same Cantor that voted against the "Violence Against Women" act and who routinely votes against women's issues.
The Truth

Saint Paul, MN

#41 Feb 28, 2013
Gee, I'm a dumb employee....

What would I rather have: time and a half now or straight time in the future?

Let's see now, my total gross income would go down.
Is that a bad thing?
The Truth

Saint Paul, MN

#42 Feb 28, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>Has nothing to do with screwing anybody, your goal is to make workers less able to spend time off with their families, right?
Then why wouldn't you support making the law say "only if the employee wanted comp time instead of overtime" - according to Cantor, the employer could - and would - REQUIRE the employee to take comp time instead of overtime.

Even an idiot can see that difference.
The Truth

Saint Paul, MN

#43 Feb 28, 2013
Bushwhacked wrote:
<quoted text>Read the line where it says, "...meet the needs of employers or potential employees..". That line is TOTAL BS !!! The employer need to maximize profit AT the employees expense. QUIT LYING !!!!
You're the anti-union POS liar, who supports corporate greed and insults like a 6 year old...
When the US Chamber of Commerce supports a bill, you KNOW whose best interest the law is in.
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#44 Feb 28, 2013
The Truth wrote:
Gee, I'm a dumb employee....
What would I rather have: time and a half now or straight time in the future?
Let's see now, my total gross income would go down.
Is that a bad thing?
Gee, I am a dumb employee, I used up all my vacation days, and now I can't go see my kid in the school play.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 1 Injured In North Minneapolis Shooting 8 hr wichita-rick 3
Sued in small claims court in different state 12 hr LIbEralS 2
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) Sep 27 FaIth Breeds Stup... 35,579
Statewide protective agency (Oct '15) Sep 26 Troy 34
News Fmr. Prior Lake Youth Pastor Charged With Havin... Sep 26 Paris Hilton 24
Sick hillary Sep 25 LIbEralS 11
News Ramsey County / Meth dealer's motives in sting ... (Aug '08) Sep 24 Lynnhollenbeck 13

Minneapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages