This letter regards the Bush Administration's overtime reform, which eventually went into effect on August 23, 2004. At this point, its effect on individual workers is unclear. For more information, visit http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/20/politics/main637405.shtml
Sept. 23, 2003
Dear Senator Bond:
Dear Senator Talent:
I learned from an article in the Labor Tribune that Senators Bond and Talent voted in favor of the Bush overtime pay plan. I am disappointed that the Missouri Senators voted against workers’ interests. Under this plan’s vague language, "anyone doing work of ‘substantial importance’ – in the employer’s opinion – could be exempt [from receiving overtime]" (qtd. from Senate dumps Bush overtime ban, Labor Tribune, Sept. 2003). This would have banned eligibility for millions of workers.
However, I am pleased that the Senate majority rejected this plan.
Sincerely,
Gus Stevenson
*************************************
Senator Talent’s response:
Dear Mr. Stevenson:
Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts on President Bush's proposed changes to the employee overtime rules. I appreciate the time you have taken to share your views with me, and I apologize for the delay in my response.
I read the proposed rule and saw several respects in which it would expand overtime coverage. For example, under current law, only a worker who earns less than $8,000 per year automatically qualifies for overtime. The proposed changes will raise this threshold, which has been unchanged since 1975, to $22,000. This change alone will secure overtime for 1.3 million American workers. Additionally, the new rules will help define the role of "white collar" employees, ensuring that low-income workers get the overtime they deserve. Importantly, the proposed rule change will not affect police or firefighters. In fact, the new regulations will make it less likely that these workers could lose overtime, since it provides that they cannot be exempted as "professional" employees unless they are doing office work-a protection that does not exist in current law.The proposed regulations are designed to update the language and terminology of rules that have been around for 70 years. American industry no longer uses "straw boss" or "leg men" and those terms shouldn't be in the government's overtime rules. In fact, the government's regulations should be clear and up to date so people have real guidance about what the law entails. The current system promotes needless conflict and litigation, the costs of which workers and consumers have to pay.
I suspect that the organized attack on these proposed regulations is political in nature. Overtime regulations are complicated, so it is hard for the press or public to determine the truth of any particular charge, and that encourages interest groups to be irresponsible. I know that during the last campaign I was accused of voting to force workers to accept compensatory leave rather than overtime, and that was completely untrue.
In short, the proposed regulations will expand overtime coverage for some workers who currently are unprotected, and I could not find any groups who would clearly lose protection. I saw no reason not to allow the Department of Labor to continue working on the regulations. Of course, the regulations are in a preliminary stage, and I will watch them carefully as they go through the administrative process.
I certainly agree with you that the regulations should not restrict coverage and would be pleased to respond to any specific concerns you might have.
Again, thank you for contacting me. If I may be of further assistance, please don't hesitate to call or write.
Thank you for your email. To contact me on this or any other subject,
please go to http://talent.senate.gov/contact/index.html
Sincerely,
Senator Jim Talent