HR Management & Compliance

Workplace Scheduling: Daily Overtime Scrapped; Other Revolutionary Changes May Be On The Way

Major changes are in the pipeline that could dramatically alter how California works. First, in a historic development, daily overtime for most workers may be eliminated. And other proposals are under consideration on such important issues as comp time, alternative workweeks and family leave. Here are the details, along with how they might affect you.

Weekly Overtime In California

The California Industrial Welfare Commission agreed on April 11 to align California’s overtime law with federal standards. The Commission’s vote scraps the state’s 80-year-old rule requiring that private-sector, non-union employees be paid overtime for working more than eight hours in a day. The goal is to simplify flexible scheduling and make it easier to set up alternative workweeks such as four 10-hour days.


The HR Management & Compliance Report: How To Comply with California Wage & Hour Law, explains everything you need to know to stay in compliance with the state’s complex and ever-changing rules, laws, and regulations in this area. Coverage on bonuses, meal and rest breaks, overtime, alternative workweeks, final paychecks, and more.


The Commission’s decision calls for time-and-a-half only after a 40-hour week. The action also does away with mandatory double-time pay after 12 hours in a day. These changes bring California in line with 47 other states already following the federal overtime law. The ruling doesn’t affect managerial, administrative, professional or sales employees who are exempt from overtime, nor does it impact federal, state or local government workers. Also, the new rules will not apply to workers covered by collective bargaining agreements.

Only Certain Employers Covered

Not widely known is the fact that the new rule will only apply to five of the state’s 15 wage order groups for different industries and occupations: Manufacturing; Public Housekeeping (e.g., hotels and restaurants); Professional, Technical and Clerical; Mercantile (e.g., grocers, retailers/ wholesalers); and Transportation.

Industries and occupations not covered by the overtime change are: Agricultural Occupations; Broadcasting; Canning and Freezing; Household Occupations; Linen and Laundry; Motion Pictures; Personal Service; and Preparing Agricultural Products on the Farm.

Some Obstacles Remain

When the law will take effect is uncertain. The Commission first said July was a possibility, but has now indicated that because of the paperwork and notices that must be provided, the earliest effective date will be January 1, 1998. A bill to undo the Commission’s action (AB 15) seems likely to pass the legislature, but faces certain veto from Governor Wilson. Labor groups have also filed suit to block implementation of the new rules. Plus, two of the commissioners have not been confirmed by the state Senate, though their vote will likely stand.

Other Action Taken

During the same meeting, the Commission left intact California’s strict definition of exempt workers. The members rejected a proposal to provide a more flexible standard for the amount of time an employee must spend on exempt tasks to qualify for exempt status. Finally, the Commission approved a new regulation permitting employees to waive meal periods in writing. This rule should take effect January 1, 1998. (See CEA April 1997 for a discussion of these two items.)

Comp Time May Be On The Way

Both the White House and Republicans are pushing for legislation that would allow workers to swap overtime pay for compensatory time off. But the two sides differ on the details. President Clinton wants employees, if they choose, to be able to bank up to 80 hours of comp time. Part-time and temporary workers would be excluded because they are considered vulnerable to being forced to accept comp time instead of overtime pay. The Republicans want all employees to have the right to bank up to 240 hours a year.

The House recently passed a bill that would allow employers to provide 1.5 hours of comp time for each hour of overtime worked, as long as the worker agrees in writing. The bill’s provisions are limited to employees who have worked at least 1,000 hours and would permit them to accrue only 16 hours of comp time a year. Clinton has promised to veto this bill, but because both political parties want to enact comp time rules, a compromise may yet be reached. (See CEA August 1996 and February 1994 for California’s comp time rules.)

New Alternative Workweeks

Republicans have also proposed biweekly alternative workweek schedules allowing employees to volunteer to work 80 hours in any combination during a two-week period without receiving overtime pay. In view of the ruckus created in California over eliminating daily overtime, efforts to expand the federal overtime base period beyond 40 hours a week will likely face a stiff uphill battle.

Liberalized Family Leave Benefits

President Clinton is pushing hard to broaden benefits under the federal family leave law that currently covers employers with 50 or more workers and requires up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave a year. Administration-backed proposals would allow employees an additional 24 hours of unpaid leave every year to participate in their children’s school activities, keep routine medical appointments, or attend to elderly relatives’ health needs. Clinton has already asked federal agency heads to begin providing this benefit to their employees. Current law requires employers to give workers family leave only for a serious illness or the birth or adoption of a child.

Although not commonly known, California already requires employers with 25 or more workers to provide employees with up to 40 hours of unpaid leave per year to participate in their children’s school activities. (See CEA November 1994 for details.)

Clinton also seeks to bring smaller employers into the family leave fold by dropping the threshold for coverage from companies with 50 or more em- ployees to firms employing 25 or more workers. Critics complain that such an expansion could pose hardships for small employers, who typically lack the staff to cover for absent employees and don’t have the HR resources to effectively administer the law.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *