The Low-Wage Neo-Confederate Administration's War On Overtime

'Lipstick on a Pig'

Last March, the Bush administration proposed regulations to eliminate overtime pay for more than eight million workers. Yesterday, after enduring withering criticism over the past year, the administration "scaled back its plans." Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao insists "our intent is always to strengthen overtime protections." But many still believe that the revised rules "favored corporate America and denied overtime pay to many middle-class workers just when they were feeling an economic squeeze." Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) summed it up: "You put lipstick on a pig, but guess what? It's still a pig."

NEW LOOPHOLES MEAN LESS OVERTIME FOR WORKERS: The new rules preclude numerous job categories – including pharmacists, administrative assistants and chefs – from receiving overtime pay. Even more disturbing, the new rules exempt workers who fit into broad, ambiguous categories such as "team leader" from receiving overtime. The result is that employers could "redefine workers' roles so companies could avoid paying overtime." The regulation would also broaden the overtime-exempt category of "learned professionals" by lowering educational standards.

ADMINISTRATION SUGGESTS HOW TO STIFF LOW-WAGE WORKERS: The Bush administration claims their new rules guarantee overtime pay for workers who earn as much as $23,660 per year, up from the current ceiling of $8,060. But the new figure is still extraordinarily low. Christine Owens, AFL-CIO director of public policy, notes that "families with that income [$23,660] qualify for food stamps." Worse, "the salary figures are set and will not change with inflation." As a result, each year "more and more people will lose the guarantee." But even those who believe themselves to be guaranteed overtime under the new rules may be unpleasantly surprised. Last March, the Labor Department advised businesses they could avoid increased salaries by cutting the workers' salaries and then adding the new overtime costs to equal the former salary.

HAPPY TALK, CRUEL ACTION: Even though the administration itself acknowledges that tens of thousands of workers will lose federal overtime protections, Chao said "few, if any" workers will be hurt. But if the administration was truly committed to maintaining workers' overtime eligibility, it could take simple steps to do so. AFL-CIO President John Sweeney suggests the administration "support pending legislation in Congress that would guarantee workers' overtime rights and repeal any part of the regulation that cuts overtime." Without such guarantees, the new regulations are exposed as an effort to "take money directly out of the pockets of workers and put it into the hands of the president's corporate campaign contributors."

500 PAGES OF PURE SIMPLICITY: Chao claims that the Labor Department issued the rules not to deny workers overtime but to "simplify regulations governing more than 100 million American workers." This sentiment is echoed by corporate leaders like Katherine Lugar of the National Retail Federation, who said after the new rules become law "we'll have more clarity." But in fact the new rules run almost 500 pages long. Even supporters admit it will "take days to assess exactly how many workers are disqualified from overtime pay." No one yet can say "which workers earning between 23,660 and $100,000 would still qualify for overtime pay."