Facility & Company Information > Company Information
DZ Atlantic Group
snowman:
--- Quote from: walstib on Sep 03, 2010, 07:56 ---Last time I worked for them they didn't believe in paying for holidays. (Hmmm, :-\ I wonder if they still billed the utility for them though.)
They also told me once that my rate of pay was such that my overtime was to be paid as straight time. I countered with their initial verbal offer, and the acceptance agreement form I had signed, stated time and a half for overtime. When we looked it up I was right so they told me that was obviously a mistake and I was to be paid straight time for all hours worked. I said it might be a mistake, but I didn't make it and expected them to keep their end of the agreement. After a lot of other back and forth discussions they finally agreed that that's what they would pay.
Would I work for them again? Sure. They were up front with the no holiday pay so as long as it's identified and agreed upon in the beginning I have no problems with it. Just make sure they don't try and change horses on you downstream.
--- End quote ---
You'd work for a company again that wanted to pay you straight wages for overtime hours? And people wonder why this industry went in the crapper 15-20 years ago...
Sun Dog:
--- Quote from: snowman on Sep 30, 2010, 04:21 --- You'd work for a company again that wanted to pay you straight wages for overtime hours? And people wonder why this industry went in the crapper 15-20 years ago...
--- End quote ---
ST wages for OT hours is not such a bitter pill to swallow when your ST rate is treble the prevailing wages.
But then again, I may be right.
walstib:
--- Quote from: Sun Dog on Sep 30, 2010, 10:54 ---ST wages for OT hours is not such a bitter pill to swallow when your ST rate is treble the prevailing wages.
But then again, I may be right.
--- End quote ---
Exactly +K. I previously worked a job out of the country where my pay rate was such that all hours worked were at a straight rate. That was our deal up front and I had no problem with it.
The job with DZ Atlantic was as a Rad Eng and the pay rate was comparable to what I had been paid in Canada. The difference was this time they had told me they would pay me time and a half for overtime. That was our deal (and signed agreement), so when they tried to back out of it I wouldn't let them and made them pay me time and a half when appropriate. Would I work for them again. I already have. They come up with the money and a position I want and I'll take a job with them. Just make sure what your deal is up front and don't let them bluff you out of it later. :)
snowman:
--- Quote from: Sun Dog on Sep 30, 2010, 10:54 ---ST wages for OT hours is not such a bitter pill to swallow when your ST rate is treble the prevailing wages.
But then again, I may be right.
--- End quote ---
I don't think you are. $30.00 dollars an hour give or take a couple bucks is the prevailing wage for most jobs right now. I believe you meant to write triple, not treble, prevailing wages. And nobody is getting 90 bucks an hour to swing a meter in this country. Nobody. Most "house " jobs pay $35-40/hr.
Look, pill swallowing aside, there are state and federal laws which dictate when and if overtime is to be paid. Nearly all the time, at least time and a half is to paid. According to the US Dept of Labor, Wage and Hour Divsion, "You must be paid 1.5 times your basic rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a week. There are some exceptions." 99.97% of the time an hourly worker won't fall under the exceptions. We're not talkling about salaried or exempt folks here so let's get that out of the way right now. This is about hourly craft workers performing a trade. The Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act states, "Covered workers must be paid at least one and one-half times their basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 a week..." I could go on and on but I won't.
Bottom line, if technicians are getting paid straight wages for overtime, your company loves you. Because they're billing the client time and a half and paying you straight, and will be perceived as someone they can get one over on. The person who started this thread got his (or her) premium pay because that's the law, and the company knew it.
Sun Dog:
--- Quote from: snowman on Oct 03, 2010, 12:52 ---I don't think you are. $30.00 dollars an hour give or take a couple bucks is the prevailing wage for most jobs right now. I believe you meant to write triple, not treble, prevailing wages. And nobody is getting 90 bucks an hour to swing a meter in this country. Nobody. Most "house " jobs pay $35-40/hr.
Look, pill swallowing aside, there are state and federal laws which dictate when and if overtime is to be paid. Nearly all the time, at least time and a half is to paid. According to the US Dept of Labor, Wage and Hour Divsion, "You must be paid 1.5 times your basic rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a week. There are some exceptions." 99.97% of the time an hourly worker won't fall under the exceptions. We're not talkling about salaried or exempt folks here so let's get that out of the way right now. This is about hourly craft workers performing a trade. The Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act states, "Covered workers must be paid at least one and one-half times their basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 a week..." I could go on and on but I won't.
Bottom line, if technicians are getting paid straight wages for overtime, your company loves you. Because they're billing the client time and a half and paying you straight, and will be perceived as someone they can get one over on. The person who started this thread got his (or her) premium pay because that's the law, and the company knew it.
--- End quote ---
Sorry, didn't realize the discussion was limited to "meter swingers." For the past 20 (+/-) years I have beed paid straight wages for my 'OT' hours. Some assignments were as a salaried employee, most as an hourly employee. I accept this situation because my hourly wage is high enough to more than compensate for the loss of 1-1/2 times ST rate for OT hours. The 10 years before that was mostly 1-1/2 for OT, I like the situation I have now much better.
BTW, I meant to write treble, not triple. I'll save you the trouble of looking it up:
tre·ble /ˈtrɛbəl/ [treb-uhl]
adjective, noun, verb, -bled, -bling.
–adjective
1. threefold; triple.
2. Music .
a. of or pertaining to the highest part in harmonized music; soprano.
b. of the highest pitch or range, as a voice part, voice, singer, or instrument.
c. high in pitch; shrill.
–noun
3. Music .
a. the treble or soprano part.
b. a treble voice, singer, or instrument.
4. a high or shrill voice or sound.
5. the highest-pitched peal of a bell.
–verb (used with object), verb (used without object)
6. to make or become three times as much or as many; triple.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version