A DIY & home improvement forum. DIYbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » DIYbanter forum » Do - it - Yourself » Home Repair
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems.

Time and a half for over 40 hours



 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old April 7th 13, 02:18 AM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,130
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:35 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 15:58:08 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 07:42:13 -0400, Meanie
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 12:51 AM, Bill Graham wrote:


My point is simple. Unless you can prove that you were layed off
for reasons unrelated to your job performance and or money
restrictions, you can probably do nothing about it.

Laid off or fired is irrelevant. If enough time elapse with the
job, the ex-employee can collect unemployment compensation.
Not if you are fired "with cause" in Canada - at least in Ontario.


Doesn't it depend on the cause? If the job changes and you're now not
qualified, it is a firing with cause (incompetency) but it's not
something you can do anything about.


True. And this happens to many people in this computer age. I was a high
energy physics machind operator. They obsoleted my machind and transferred
me to a new, much larger and more complicated machind when I was older and
less able to memorize large quantities of information. They didnlt lay me
off, but they instituted a, "geezer elimination program" (my descriotion)
where they paid you two weeks salery for every year you had been with them
(up to a maximum of a years pay.) Since I had been with them for 28 years, I
g9ot a years pay to leave, so I retired at the age of 61, but didn't start
collecting any social security until the following year, at 62.

It is "constructive dismissal" in Canada - and is NOT "with cause".
The employer pays
Ads
  #62  
Old April 7th 13, 02:35 AM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:35 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 15:58:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 07:42:13 -0400, Meanie
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 12:51 AM, Bill Graham wrote:


My point is simple. Unless you can prove that you were layed off
for reasons unrelated to your job performance and or money
restrictions, you can probably do nothing about it.

Laid off or fired is irrelevant. If enough time elapse with the
job, the ex-employee can collect unemployment compensation.
Not if you are fired "with cause" in Canada - at least in Ontario.

Doesn't it depend on the cause? If the job changes and you're now
not qualified, it is a firing with cause (incompetency) but it's not
something you can do anything about.


True. And this happens to many people in this computer age. I was a
high energy physics machind operator. They obsoleted my machind and
transferred me to a new, much larger and more complicated machind
when I was older and less able to memorize large quantities of
information. They didnlt lay me off, but they instituted a, "geezer
elimination program" (my descriotion) where they paid you two weeks
salery for every year you had been with them (up to a maximum of a
years pay.) Since I had been with them for 28 years, I g9ot a years
pay to leave, so I retired at the age of 61, but didn't start
collecting any social security until the following year, at 62.

It is "constructive dismissal" in Canada - and is NOT "with cause".
The employer pays


You speak as if it were a law. In Canada, it may well be a law. Here there
is no such law. If your employer wants to get rid of some people, he just
lets them go, but pays them for their accumulated vacion time. When I left
Stanford University, they didn;t even pay for ones accumulated sick leave. I
had around 6 months sick leave on the books, (I was almost never sick) and
didn;t get paid for that. Smaller businesses here in those days, didn;t pay
for vacations or holidays, either. Bsck in the mid 60's I worked for a place
that fixed shipboard radars, and one day, my boss said, "Tomorrow.s the 4th
of July, so you guys don;t have to come in". We all thought we would be
paid, but when we got our checks a couple of weeks later, we only got paid
for 4 days that week...:^)

  #63  
Old April 7th 13, 03:27 AM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,130
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 18:35:32 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:35 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 15:58:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 07:42:13 -0400, Meanie
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 12:51 AM, Bill Graham wrote:


My point is simple. Unless you can prove that you were layed off
for reasons unrelated to your job performance and or money
restrictions, you can probably do nothing about it.

Laid off or fired is irrelevant. If enough time elapse with the
job, the ex-employee can collect unemployment compensation.
Not if you are fired "with cause" in Canada - at least in Ontario.

Doesn't it depend on the cause? If the job changes and you're now
not qualified, it is a firing with cause (incompetency) but it's not
something you can do anything about.

True. And this happens to many people in this computer age. I was a
high energy physics machind operator. They obsoleted my machind and
transferred me to a new, much larger and more complicated machind
when I was older and less able to memorize large quantities of
information. They didnlt lay me off, but they instituted a, "geezer
elimination program" (my descriotion) where they paid you two weeks
salery for every year you had been with them (up to a maximum of a
years pay.) Since I had been with them for 28 years, I g9ot a years
pay to leave, so I retired at the age of 61, but didn't start
collecting any social security until the following year, at 62.

It is "constructive dismissal" in Canada - and is NOT "with cause".
The employer pays


You speak as if it were a law. In Canada, it may well be a law. Here there
is no such law. If your employer wants to get rid of some people, he just
lets them go, but pays them for their accumulated vacion time. When I left
Stanford University, they didn;t even pay for ones accumulated sick leave. I
had around 6 months sick leave on the books, (I was almost never sick) and
didn;t get paid for that. Smaller businesses here in those days, didn;t pay
for vacations or holidays, either. Bsck in the mid 60's I worked for a place
that fixed shipboard radars, and one day, my boss said, "Tomorrow.s the 4th
of July, so you guys don;t have to come in". We all thought we would be
paid, but when we got our checks a couple of weeks later, we only got paid
for 4 days that week...:^)

Accumulated sick leave is a perk that is generally regulated by your
employment contract - if non-union it usually does not exist. Many
unions are having to let that "bonus" go. I say good riddance. Not
sure how it is in the USA, but since the sixties here in Ontario
vacation pay has been mandatory in all but a few select job classes
(education, police service, and a few others). It differs from
province to province. 4% of total earnings from day one, and 2 weeks
time off after one year - 6% and 3 weeks after 5 years in Ontario.
Statutary holidaysvary depending whether you are in a provincially or
federally regulated industry - some stats are provincial, some are
federal.

Again - this is Canada (and Ontario) specific. We are a "socialist"
society - The "american way" may differ.
  #64  
Old April 7th 13, 03:30 AM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,855
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:35 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 15:58:08 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 07:42:13 -0400, Meanie
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 12:51 AM, Bill Graham wrote:


My point is simple. Unless you can prove that you were layed off
for reasons unrelated to your job performance and or money
restrictions, you can probably do nothing about it.

Laid off or fired is irrelevant. If enough time elapse with the
job, the ex-employee can collect unemployment compensation.
Not if you are fired "with cause" in Canada - at least in Ontario.


Doesn't it depend on the cause? If the job changes and you're now not
qualified, it is a firing with cause (incompetency) but it's not
something you can do anything about.


True. And this happens to many people in this computer age. I was a high
energy physics machind operator. They obsoleted my machind and transferred
me to a new, much larger and more complicated machind when I was older and
less able to memorize large quantities of information. They didnlt lay me
off, but they instituted a, "geezer elimination program" (my descriotion)
where they paid you two weeks salery for every year you had been with them
(up to a maximum of a years pay.) Since I had been with them for 28 years, I
g9ot a years pay to leave, so I retired at the age of 61, but didn't start
collecting any social security until the following year, at 62.


When I (was) retired (laid off, RIF'd, whatever - could have
interviewed for a number of other positions but it was time to go)
from IBM they paid me for 6 months, plus all vacation, and gave me a
year's medical insurance, too (my retirement insurance picked up from
there until I got a job with insurance). I started collecting my
retirement immediately but will try to go another five years, until
full SS age. Maybe longer, maybe not.

Layoffs are certainly different from firings, though. Layoffs are
common even states that are not "at will".
  #65  
Old April 7th 13, 03:32 AM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,855
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 18:17:28 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:38:37 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 21:51:39 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 14:55:13 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 14:11:53 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 22:46:40 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Ned Flanders wrote:
Metspitzer wrote:
http://www.ehow.com/list_6734806_geo...ours-work.html

My niece just started working for a company yesterday. She
is working in a convenient store that also sells gas. She
has almost no job experience. She says her boss does not
pay time and a half for over 40 hours.

I am assuming that if she says anything, the boss will just
quit telling her to come in. What is the best way to
address this problem?

It seems her hands maybe tied if she wants to stick it out
for a while.
My wife went in to a business for a shift on a trial bases.
After the one 9 hour shift (she was asked to stay extra) my
wife decided she could not work there because of the owners
constantly barking dog and crying baby (and this was in a
shop in a mall?)...

Two weeks later she had not been paid so she emailed the
woman asking for her 8 hours pay and one hour OT. The
woman told her she does not pay OT.

My wife emailed her back with a copy of the labour laws... a
week later she received a cheque in the mail for the correct
amount.

Sometimes owners or managers need a reminder of the labour
laws.

Almost anyone at almost any time can be fired for almost
anything. There is no way to get inside your boss's mind and
know why he wants to keep some people and fire others, and he
can come up with a number of reasons to get rid of most
anyone. (if he has half a brain) So, there is little one can
do unless one has some written proof or recorded proof that
ones boss has it in for them for some reason other than job
performance. This is true of even top executives. As a
matter of fact, it is more true of top executives than it is
of underlings....

IN CANADA, a boss needs to write you up 3 times, giving you
the written notice, before he can fire you "with cause"
Firing "without cause" costs him money. He has to pay
severence - and you get to collect employment insurance if
you have worked enough hours to qualify.

Don't know how it is in the USA.

I don't know either, but suppose the company is going out of
business, and the, "boss" can't pay you another dime because
he, and his company are dirt broke? What then, pussycat? Do
you get to pluck some bucks from that money tree in Washington
DC?

Ever hear of "bankruptcy" and "stand in line"?

Of course. but conversely, have you ever heard of letting
somebody go because you can't afford to keep them? There are
many reasons for letting employees go. It is not always a matter
of choice.

Of course. The issue then becomes "who".

The generally accepted term is "layoff", but why are you stating
the obvious?

My point is simple. Unless you can prove that you were layed off
for reasons unrelated to your job performance and or money
restrictions, you can probably do nothing about it.

There is no reason you *should* be able to "do" anything about it.
What are you proposing to "do" about it?

I'm not propowint to do anything about it. Someone else was worried
that his wife's or girlfriends boss would let her go for some non
job related reason and was asking what he or she could do about it.


That question was about OT, not layoffs.

I havfe been retired for 16
years now and don't have those kinds of problems anymore... but, in
the past, I have had similar problems with idiotic bosses..... I
usually found that the best thing to do was leave and find another
job.


Certainly right.

Even if one were
to bring their case to court and win, then they are going to have to
work under a ****ed off boss for the reat of time. IOW, there is no
good solution to the problem. In the old days, things were a lot
worse than they are now. I let it slip to a prospective employer
once who I had worked for before, and he contacted that person, who
(of course) told him not to hire me. You live and learn....:^)


Why should you even be able to sue? It's their job. If you're not
the right person for it, for *whatever* reason, why should you be
there? It's *not* your property.


Well, as a libertarian, I sort of agree with you. but if they fired you
because of your skin color, (for example) they would be in big trouble. So
there are exceptions, and many of these came about during my working life,
which started back in the 60's when I got out of the Navy.


These are exceptions even in at-will states. Note that they don't
mean anything, though. A person can still be let go for no reason,
just one of a few proscribed ones.
  #66  
Old April 7th 13, 04:15 AM posted to alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

On Wednesday, April 3, 2013 6:38:13 PM UTC-4, Metspitzer wrote:
http://www.ehow.com/list_6734806_geo...ours-work.html



My niece just started working for a company yesterday. She is working

in a convenient store that also sells gas. She has almost no job

experience. She says her boss does not pay time and a half for over

40 hours.



I am assuming that if she says anything, the boss will just quit

telling her to come in. What is the best way to address this problem?


Beat the piece of **** to death. The department of labor needs to be destroyed.
  #67  
Old April 7th 13, 05:20 AM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,855
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 22:27:43 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 18:35:32 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:35 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 15:58:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 07:42:13 -0400, Meanie
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 12:51 AM, Bill Graham wrote:


My point is simple. Unless you can prove that you were layed off
for reasons unrelated to your job performance and or money
restrictions, you can probably do nothing about it.

Laid off or fired is irrelevant. If enough time elapse with the
job, the ex-employee can collect unemployment compensation.
Not if you are fired "with cause" in Canada - at least in Ontario.

Doesn't it depend on the cause? If the job changes and you're now
not qualified, it is a firing with cause (incompetency) but it's not
something you can do anything about.

True. And this happens to many people in this computer age. I was a
high energy physics machind operator. They obsoleted my machind and
transferred me to a new, much larger and more complicated machind
when I was older and less able to memorize large quantities of
information. They didnlt lay me off, but they instituted a, "geezer
elimination program" (my descriotion) where they paid you two weeks
salery for every year you had been with them (up to a maximum of a
years pay.) Since I had been with them for 28 years, I g9ot a years
pay to leave, so I retired at the age of 61, but didn't start
collecting any social security until the following year, at 62.
It is "constructive dismissal" in Canada - and is NOT "with cause".
The employer pays


You speak as if it were a law. In Canada, it may well be a law. Here there
is no such law. If your employer wants to get rid of some people, he just
lets them go, but pays them for their accumulated vacion time. When I left
Stanford University, they didn;t even pay for ones accumulated sick leave. I
had around 6 months sick leave on the books, (I was almost never sick) and
didn;t get paid for that. Smaller businesses here in those days, didn;t pay
for vacations or holidays, either. Bsck in the mid 60's I worked for a place
that fixed shipboard radars, and one day, my boss said, "Tomorrow.s the 4th
of July, so you guys don;t have to come in". We all thought we would be
paid, but when we got our checks a couple of weeks later, we only got paid
for 4 days that week...:^)

Accumulated sick leave is a perk that is generally regulated by your
employment contract - if non-union it usually does not exist. Many
unions are having to let that "bonus" go. I say good riddance. Not
sure how it is in the USA, but since the sixties here in Ontario
vacation pay has been mandatory in all but a few select job classes
(education, police service, and a few others). It differs from
province to province. 4% of total earnings from day one, and 2 weeks
time off after one year - 6% and 3 weeks after 5 years in Ontario.
Statutary holidaysvary depending whether you are in a provincially or
federally regulated industry - some stats are provincial, some are
federal.


Nothing mandatory about vacation at all. Why should it be? The
question whether any time accrued is paid upon termination. This is
certainly jurisdiction and custom dependant.

Again - this is Canada (and Ontario) specific. We are a "socialist"
society - The "american way" may differ.


Thankfully.
  #69  
Old April 7th 13, 01:52 PM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,769
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

In article ,
"Bill Graham" wrote:


Which opens up a whole new bag of worms.... Is Kleptomania a treatable
disease? And, if so, can you be fired for contracting a treatable disease?


It isn't treatable in the sense that you can take something for it
(sorry). Psychotherapy is about the only treatment with any science
behind it.
Obviously you can fire someone for stealing from you.
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe
  #70  
Old April 7th 13, 04:19 PM posted to misc.legal,alt.home.repair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default Time and a half for over 40 hours

wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 18:35:32 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:35 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 15:58:08 -0400,
wrote:

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 07:42:13 -0400, Meanie
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 12:51 AM, Bill Graham wrote:


My point is simple. Unless you can prove that you were layed
off for reasons unrelated to your job performance and or money
restrictions, you can probably do nothing about it.

Laid off or fired is irrelevant. If enough time elapse with the
job, the ex-employee can collect unemployment compensation.
Not if you are fired "with cause" in Canada - at least in
Ontario.

Doesn't it depend on the cause? If the job changes and you're now
not qualified, it is a firing with cause (incompetency) but it's
not something you can do anything about.

True. And this happens to many people in this computer age. I was a
high energy physics machind operator. They obsoleted my machind and
transferred me to a new, much larger and more complicated machind
when I was older and less able to memorize large quantities of
information. They didnlt lay me off, but they instituted a, "geezer
elimination program" (my descriotion) where they paid you two weeks
salery for every year you had been with them (up to a maximum of a
years pay.) Since I had been with them for 28 years, I g9ot a years
pay to leave, so I retired at the age of 61, but didn't start
collecting any social security until the following year, at 62.
It is "constructive dismissal" in Canada - and is NOT "with cause".
The employer pays


You speak as if it were a law. In Canada, it may well be a law. Here
there is no such law. If your employer wants to get rid of some
people, he just lets them go, but pays them for their accumulated
vacion time. When I left Stanford University, they didn;t even pay
for ones accumulated sick leave. I had around 6 months sick leave on
the books, (I was almost never sick) and didn;t get paid for that.
Smaller businesses here in those days, didn;t pay for vacations or
holidays, either. Bsck in the mid 60's I worked for a place that
fixed shipboard radars, and one day, my boss said, "Tomorrow.s the
4th of July, so you guys don;t have to come in". We all thought we
would be paid, but when we got our checks a couple of weeks later,
we only got paid for 4 days that week...:^)

Accumulated sick leave is a perk that is generally regulated by your
employment contract - if non-union it usually does not exist. Many
unions are having to let that "bonus" go. I say good riddance. Not
sure how it is in the USA, but since the sixties here in Ontario
vacation pay has been mandatory in all but a few select job classes
(education, police service, and a few others). It differs from
province to province. 4% of total earnings from day one, and 2 weeks
time off after one year - 6% and 3 weeks after 5 years in Ontario.
Statutary holidaysvary depending whether you are in a provincially or
federally regulated industry - some stats are provincial, some are
federal.

Again - this is Canada (and Ontario) specific. We are a "socialist"
society - The "american way" may differ.


Oh, not to worry. We are catching up. We are getting more and more
socialized every year. I hate it, because it cripples the free enterprise
system, but I am only one small voice in an ocean of shouting. When money is
plentiful, the socialism seems to work pretty well. But when a small
business is going under, these laws just serve to sink it faster. (which may
not be a bad thing)

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Should a pool light bulb be touching water only halfway (half in, half out)? Terra Arcane Home Repair 0 July 4th 10 06:43 AM
D*am forte, it has been down for 1 and a half hours. Wes[_2_] Metalworking 10 February 2nd 10 02:56 AM
Bluetooth Headset, 200 Hours of Standby Time [email protected] Electronics Repair 0 April 9th 08 02:35 PM
Jos completed this weekend so far -1, time in A&E 2.5 hours. NeedforSwede2 UK diy 16 April 25th 06 01:40 PM
Mixer shower only working half the time Red UK diy 0 July 27th 05 11:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2004-2014 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.