salary requirements

Jeffrey · December 2001

Is there a limit to how many hours that I can ask my exempt employees to work?

Down_the_Middle · December 2001

I would say legally, NO, but practically, YES. In my 30 yrs of HR management experience I believe an exempt employee should consistently work an avg of 45 hrs/week. Anyone who can consistently work 40 hrs (or less) has either stumbled across a new time management method (for which they s/b on the lecture circuit)or they're probably not doing what they're paid to do.

When work volume requires the exempt person to consistently work more than 50 hrs per week, that signals that something's not right. Either the workload is disproportionate or the person's attentiveness may be suffering. Something's amiss and should probably be investigated. It's not healthy for individuals to work 55-60 hrs per week for extended periods of time and many employers will address this with addt'l compensation, perks or other recognition means. You've not mentioned how many hours these exempt people are working, or what their positions are, so it's hard to generalize. I have some exempt people on our staff who feel they are victims of enslavement by working 42 or 43 hrs per week...... it's not something for which I find a great deal of sympathy......... They just don't get it!

JustAnEmployee · December 2001

Down the Middle,

From my understanding on the exempt/non-exempt classification, I can be considered exempt solely due to the fact that I'm an IT professional and my salary is considered to be above the non-exempt threshold. For example, I work for Company A as a consultant. Company A contracts my services out to Company B for x amount of dollars per hour. If I work 45 hours a week, then the client gets billed for 45 hours but I get paid for 40 hours. I do not have set workloads, so I can easily be required to work 60 hours a week to accomplish a task for one client or only 40 hours a week to accomplish a different task for another client. If I don't work 40 hours a week, I'm required to use vacation time to make up the difference. Is this all kosher under FSLA for exempt personnel? What if the company paid me straight time for all of my hours, including those over 40? Does this still keep me exempt, or would we be transgressing into non-exempt territory at this point? I'd be very interested in hearing your views on whether or not this is legal, etc. We're starting a consulting group with some ex-coworkers and want to make sure that our policies will all be legal.

Gillian · December 2001

To - Just an Employee. You don't say where you are located but if you are in California you should be aware that a new law (September 2000) makes many IT workers who would be exempt from overtime under Federal regulations subject to overtime under California regulations. If employees are NOT doing high level systems analysis sofware engineering or related work and if they are not making $42.64 per hour (subject to annual changes based on the Ca. Consumer Price Index) they must be paid overtime - anything over eight hours a day for us. The corresponding federal exemption is $27.63. If you are in California, beware. If you are not, be happy.

JustAnEmployee · December 2001

Thanks Gillian,

We're in Virginia, but we will be working contracts nationwide. If our employees make more than the federal exemption amount, can we make them hourly or do they have to be salaried? I realize this would cost us more, but then we would just pay the OT and avoid any future legal hassles. Our initial plan was to go with exempt employees and pay straight time for all hours worked, but I'm not getting a feel as to whether that's allowed either.

Cathie · December 2001

If an employee qualifies as exempt, you may still classify them as non-exempt. You can have everyone in the company up to and including the CEO as non-exempt if you want to. It is only illegal to classify someone as exempt whose job duties define them as non-exempt.

C_J · January 2002

There were a few comments here that concern me as an HR professional.

First, if you work less than 40, you are require you to take vacation hours, for any hour(s) short of 40 hours? If you are required to count your hours worked for your payroll purposes, sounds like a problem with your classification as exempt.

Second, "if you work over 40 hours, they only pay you for 40 hours" is not correct. As an exempt employee, you are paid a salary. A salary that you agreed to accept when you accepted the position, knowing that it was an exempt position and a minimum number of hours were expected in a week. If you are unhappy about the number of hours your position requires, you should talk to your supervisor or HR. If they do not agree that it is a problem, you can always advise them that it is a problem for you by looking for another position in another company that will meet your needs. Just remember the grass is not always greener.

If you decide to remain with your current company, you may want to adjust your thinking about the phrase, "they only pay me for 40", that is an hourly or non-exempt employee comment, not an exempt employee comment. Most companies expect more from their exempt employees and most exempt employees give more to their companies.

Rockie · December 2001

I agree with Down the Middle. In HR, I work no less than 45 hours a week, but usually between 45-50, depending on what's going on - but I know when I go over 10 hours a day, I lose my effectiveness. We have people at both ends of the spectrum - our CEO probably works between 60-70 hours a week consistently, but he is a powerhouse and fortunately, realizes that not everyone can work like this.

On the other end of the spectrum, one of our exempt employees drags in at 9AM, works out at lunchtime every day and then takes her lunch. She then cuts out everyday between 3:30 and 4:00 to play tennis. She has scheduled herself to work 36 hours a week and if she works over this, she expects "comp" time. Don't you wish you had this job! I'm glad she's not mine to supervise!

salary requirements

Comments