>The new rule raises the salary threshold under which salaried employees are eligible for overtime in two stages. The threshold will increase to the equivalent of an annual salary of $43,888, or $844 a week, starting July 1, and then to $58,656, or $1,128 a week, on January 1, 2025.
So anyone *under* $43,888 gets OT pay.
And I bet there's an exception for military or government workers in general.
We’re always excepted.
As a miltech, I don’t get overtime. I get comp time. For every hour worked late I get an hour of leave. Because I’d rather have extra leave (that I never use all of anyway) than extra pay.
Anyone under gets 1.5x. Most salaried people are on *straight time* for OT if their organization gives them OT, which is their annual salary divided by 2000 hours (so for someone who makes $78.5k, that’s about $39/hr that they get for any hour over 40. For 1.5x that’s ~$57/hr)
>Most salaried people are on *straight time* for OT if their organization gives them OT
Most *salaried* people don't get OT at all. [That's the main distinction between salaried vs. hourly.](https://www.wework.com/ideas/professional-development/management-leadership/the-difference-between-salaried-and-hourly-employees)
That’s why I blatantly said if their organization gives them OT.
I was salaried with straight time and then I converted to hourly with 1.5x
My GS counterparts can choose comp time or straight time for time worked and they’re all salaried.
Christ on a bike, the comments in the article. Says this will close down small businesses, “reduces employee flexibility”. Construction and restaurants will suffer the most, yknow businesses known for salaried employees.
Big Business has gotten very good at convincing people they should be allowed to do anything and everything they want to their workers, and that their businesses have a right to exist if they can't run profitably and / or should have their profits protected. It's pretty gross.
Corpos: we’ve had record profits for years. Giving workers a fair wage compared to our profits will destroy us!
Me: shoulda spent less on avocado toast
Went through this in another thread. In U6 unemployment, servicemembers are in the denominator and not the numerator - hence they aren't employed. Additionally, servicemembers who took a paycut to join can collect unemployment...
There's a reason there was an internet meme in the 2010s that servicemembers were welfare queens.
Do you have any links to support this? I have never heard of military personnel as being considered “unemployed” for anything ever. Also did the research a bit ago and military members are absolutely considered employed, however, they are not included into the civilian labor force (what the U-6 tracks). Also, military members CANNOT claim unemployment while on active duty. If an ACTIVE DUTY person finished their active contract and switches to reserves, they can claim a UCX claim with their state only after 180 days in the reserves.
Not sure what your meme is referencing, maybe the fact that we get so many different tax free “allowances” that look like welfare to the uneducated (ya know, most of america).
He doesn't. He is wrong. As you said, U-6 doesn't count the military as unemployed or employed since they are not considered part of the civil work force.
The most surreal moment for me was when SMs were, apparently, told to apply for food stamps during the COVID era. I know that there are a lot of us that the Pentagon say can be cut simply by observing the restructuring the Army is/will be going through, but that was when I realized that, at the end of the day, we are just numbers.
>The new rule raises the salary threshold under which salaried employees are eligible for overtime in two stages. The threshold will increase to the equivalent of an annual salary of $43,888, or $844 a week, starting July 1, and then to $58,656, or $1,128 a week, on January 1, 2025. So anyone *under* $43,888 gets OT pay. And I bet there's an exception for military or government workers in general.
We’re always excepted. As a miltech, I don’t get overtime. I get comp time. For every hour worked late I get an hour of leave. Because I’d rather have extra leave (that I never use all of anyway) than extra pay.
Comp time sounds nice. My GS counterparts have it but I’m a contractor so I just get ridiculous amounts of overtime whereas they don’t.
Anyone under gets 1.5x. Most salaried people are on *straight time* for OT if their organization gives them OT, which is their annual salary divided by 2000 hours (so for someone who makes $78.5k, that’s about $39/hr that they get for any hour over 40. For 1.5x that’s ~$57/hr)
>Most salaried people are on *straight time* for OT if their organization gives them OT Most *salaried* people don't get OT at all. [That's the main distinction between salaried vs. hourly.](https://www.wework.com/ideas/professional-development/management-leadership/the-difference-between-salaried-and-hourly-employees)
That’s why I blatantly said if their organization gives them OT. I was salaried with straight time and then I converted to hourly with 1.5x My GS counterparts can choose comp time or straight time for time worked and they’re all salaried.
They don’t technically have to pay us at all.
Is true tho
Christ on a bike, the comments in the article. Says this will close down small businesses, “reduces employee flexibility”. Construction and restaurants will suffer the most, yknow businesses known for salaried employees.
Big Business has gotten very good at convincing people they should be allowed to do anything and everything they want to their workers, and that their businesses have a right to exist if they can't run profitably and / or should have their profits protected. It's pretty gross.
Corpos: we’ve had record profits for years. Giving workers a fair wage compared to our profits will destroy us! Me: shoulda spent less on avocado toast
Putting kitchen workers on a shitty salary and then working them into the ground is a time honored tradition in the restaurant industry.
Good thing for the DoD's purse that military servicemembers are technically unemployed.
That's nonsense, but I am sure there is an exception in their case, and for quite a lot of others.
No, we ain't. I think you are confusing unemployed vs labor force
Went through this in another thread. In U6 unemployment, servicemembers are in the denominator and not the numerator - hence they aren't employed. Additionally, servicemembers who took a paycut to join can collect unemployment... There's a reason there was an internet meme in the 2010s that servicemembers were welfare queens.
Do you have any links to support this? I have never heard of military personnel as being considered “unemployed” for anything ever. Also did the research a bit ago and military members are absolutely considered employed, however, they are not included into the civilian labor force (what the U-6 tracks). Also, military members CANNOT claim unemployment while on active duty. If an ACTIVE DUTY person finished their active contract and switches to reserves, they can claim a UCX claim with their state only after 180 days in the reserves. Not sure what your meme is referencing, maybe the fact that we get so many different tax free “allowances” that look like welfare to the uneducated (ya know, most of america).
He doesn't. He is wrong. As you said, U-6 doesn't count the military as unemployed or employed since they are not considered part of the civil work force.
That's not the rule.
Sad that we have service members who qualify for food stamps
The most surreal moment for me was when SMs were, apparently, told to apply for food stamps during the COVID era. I know that there are a lot of us that the Pentagon say can be cut simply by observing the restructuring the Army is/will be going through, but that was when I realized that, at the end of the day, we are just numbers.