salary non-exempt vs hourly

Golf

We currently have two employee groups, exempt and hourly (hourly punching a time clock). We are talking about adding another group. That would be salary non-exempt. Do you have any insight or know of a site I can go to for information?

mwild31

Since your from Washington and WA's laws favor the employee - use this site:

[url]http://www.lni.wa.gov/[/url]

It's not as easy to use as other state, but type in FLSA into the search & you should get your answers.

Nat

Essentially, salary non-exempt is the same as hourly. You will still need to make adjustments if the employee's hours vary. For example, if the employee's salary is $400 weekly based on 40 hours and the employee works 42 hours, you will still have to pay overtime for the 2 hours worked over 40. Why would you want to make this a new category when you already have hourly employees? Seems like more of a headache to me. They will still need to keep a time sheet even if they don't punch a clock because of the non-exempt status. Just my $.02.

Don D

>Essentially, salary non-exempt is the same as hourly. You will still
>need to make adjustments if the employee's hours vary. For example,
>if the employee's salary is $400 weekly based on 40 hours and the
>employee works 42 hours, you will still have to pay overtime for the 2
>hours worked over 40. Why would you want to make this a new category
>when you already have hourly employees? Seems like more of a headache
>to me. They will still need to keep a time sheet even if they don't
>punch a clock because of the non-exempt status. Just my $.02.


On my last job, we had two pay categories; salaried and hourly. Salaried included exempt and non-exempt and included every soul who was not direct labor in production or associated with the production floor (shipping, maintenance, etc). Salaried workers were paid every other Friday. Hourly were paid every Friday. Benefits were different, including different 401(k) and holidays. Disciplinary system was different. Essentially, there was nothing the same for hourly and salary non-exempt. They were different in every respect. The only similarity, if one can call it similar, was that both had the prospect of earning overtime. Oh, all the salaried employees turned bi-weekly time sheets for multiple tracking purposes.

Hatchetman

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-10-03 AT 10:59PM (CST)[/font][p]Look at the various FLSA regualtions (29CFR778) that discuss Salaried, Non-exempts, of which there are basically two types...but one which really is salaried under the traditional definition (those whorking a fluctuating shcedule) while the other turns out to be in essence hourly, non-exempt because the work hours are fixed.

[url]http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/29cfr778_03.html[/url]

Take a look at 778.304, .306, .309., 310., .322, .323, and .325

mwild31

Again - Golf, look at the FLSA guidelines provided - but don't pursue anything until you find their counterparts in Washington State.

jampc

Maybe this is a dumb question: but why would you want salaried exempts and non exempts? Seems redundant to me. What is the reasoning behind this differntiation. If a position is salaried non-emexpt, why not just make it hourly? Seems like you would be complicating the situation. What am I missing?

Don D

One reason is because you might have a salaried benefits plan available only to persons working in the office area who are paid a guaranteed salary for hours worked, whether many or few. To fit into those benefit plans, the individuals would need to be paid accordingly. This is typically found in situations where you have union shops and non-union salaried workers. And in all places of employment where you have separate employee handbooks and benefit schedules for the hourly workers as opposed to those in the office, you would find it most suitable to utilize the definition of 'salaried-non exempt'.

jampc

Thanks Don. Haven't had to face such a choice thus far and hope I don't.