XPO | Overtime exemption

[XCCX]

The 1938 exemption was written at a time when 30% of the work force was unionized and the Union saw to the workers being fairly paid . Today 7 % of the private workforce is unionized. The majority of the non Union workforce has no voice other than their political vote And what the law states. This is a law that now causes workers to be legally exploited. The law was in part put in place at the time to appease southern lawmakers so they did not have to pay mainly black caregivers, crop workers ect a fair wage.
It’s a crude outdated exploitative law and any argument to keeping it in any way is without merit or justification. The people who want it are the ruling class and the politicians who serve them. Any working man who defends it is either misled or misleading others .

 

[Streaker69]

The 1938 exemption was written at a time when 30% of the work force was unionized and the Union saw to the workers being fairly paid . Today 7 % of the private workforce is unionized. The majority of the non Union workforce has no voice other than their political vote And what the law states. This is a law that now causes workers to be legally exploited. The law was in part put in place at the time to appease southern lawmakers so they did not have to pay mainly black caregivers, crop workers ect a fair wage.
It’s a crude outdated exploitative law any any argument to keeping it in any way is without merit or justification. The people who want it are the ruling class and the politicians who serve them.

Answer the question please

 

[icuicp]

Would you agree to a pay cut so that other people can pay less for goods and services?

I don't think you would, but you expect executives to be willing to do that. I can assure you, they won't. Can you name 1 time in history where customers solved a fiscal crisis by having their CEOs take a pay cut? At bare minimum, they'll take a dollar decrease and make it up with stocks.

2008, executives got bailed out and bonuses. COVID, executives got ppp loans (probably forgiven) and bonuses.

They'll increase prices and cut costs as long as it doesn't effect their lifestyle. Guess who that impacts? The customers and the low level employees. I'm still waiting for somebody to prove me wrong with solid evidence.

For me , what's good for the workforce is good for the executives.

Don't cut their pay. Just hire people willing to work for less and who are willing to work harder while performing the same job.

Where do you get these cheaper , harder working people?

From the lower ranks. Other countries that pay less ( yet have companies that do the same thing ) Straight out of college. Instead of an executive making $2.5 million a year plus $1.5 million in perks and benefits , you can AND WOULD find an excellent candidate that would take $400,000 and standard employee benefits.

This happens ALL THE TIME in the Blue Collar world when work is outsourced and/or given to cheaper hungrier people.

 

[Streaker69]

For me , what's good for the workforce is good for the executives.

Don't cut their pay. Just hire people willing to work for less and who are willing to work harder while performing the same job.

Where do you get these cheaper , harder working people?

From the lower ranks. Other countries that pay less ( yet have companies that do the same thing ) Straight out of college. Instead of an executive making $2.5 million a year plus $1.5 million in perks and benefits , you can AND WOULD find an excellent candidate that would take $400,000 and standard employee benefits.

This happens ALL THE TIME in the Blue Collar world when work is outsourced and/or given to cheaper hungrier people.

And what do you think the likelihood of that happening is? No board of directors is going for that. They want experience with proven results. Shareholders always come first.

I think it's funny when guys complain that their supervisors are college kids that know nothing about the trucking industry, yet you want them to run the whole thing. Interesting idea.

 

[ABF381]

And what do you think the likelihood of that happening is? No board of directors is going for that. They want experience with proven results. Shareholders always come first.

I think it's funny when guys complain that their supervisors are college kids that know nothing about the trucking industry, yet you want them to run the whole thing. Interesting idea.

Now I can't speak for the original poster but I think his point is they are a dime a dozen (sound familiar)....it isn't as much about experience with these CEOs as it is the old boys club of their buddies being on the board...if shareholders came first it wouldn't be this way....why don't they ever advertise these positions if you wanted the best canidates? Because somebody up top always has a "proven" buddy who needs a job....

 

[Streaker69]

Now I can't speak for the original poster but I think his point is they are a dime a dozen (sound familiar)....it isn't as much about experience with these CEOs as it is the old boys club of their buddies being on the board...if shareholders came first it wouldn't be this way....

I agree with that, but there is a legal requirement of fiduciary duty to shareholders. By law, they come first. As an employee, nobody cares what you think but as a shareholder you're invited to a conference call 4 times a year to get insight on what's happening. I get all the of my company info from swampratt and other truckingboard posters.

 

[Streaker69]

The conspiracy theories run deep here. Ov10 thinks the Republicans are paying me to steer public opinion. I told him to bring it to the board, but he refuses. He cares about the workers too much to feed my agenda .

Dude, I work for FedEx Freight. Get a life.

 

[Streaker69]

Oh, I forgot to add you're all too stupid to see that. Too bad you're not smart enough to know better. Shame on you triplex for engaging in a clean fair debate and exchanging ideas.... The horror lol

 

[ABF381]

I agree with that, but there is a legal requirement of fiduciary duty to shareholders. By law, they come first. As an employee, nobody cares what you think but as a shareholder you're invited to a conference call 4 times a year to get insight on what's happening. I get all the of my company info from swampratt and other truckingboard posters.

I know that there is a "legal requirement" but I believe that it is being skirted in many situations......I have enjoyed your back and forth with Triplex also.....but he is right....joking.........no I mean I agree with him.....LMAO

 

[Streaker69]

I know that there is a "legal requirement" but I believe that it is being skirted in many situations......I have enjoyed your back and forth with Triplex also.....but he is right....joking.........no I mean I agree with him.....

Every legal requirement is skirted. Unfortunately an everyday guy can't pay millions to have attorneys on payroll combing through all of this text.

I agree with him to a degree, but nobody ever looks at the negative effects when legislation is changed on a whim. There is bad that comes with this and it shouldn't be ignored. I don't believe the positive outweighs the negative at this point in time.

 

[Fly-by-night]

Part of the real reason for inflation is the companies are keeping large profit margins they have enjoyed in place while cost are going up by simply passing it on to the consumer. These companies refuse to absorb the cost While CEOs enjoy even larger compensation.

Old Dominion is a good example. They just posted a 70% O/R despite inflation. They are projecting to bring it down into the high 60s. Who do you think is paying for this . If their drivers were paid correctly with time and a half after eight would they be able to do this.

If they paid there driver correctly maybe the O/R might go up to 75 % Which is still traditionally excellent for a trucking company. .25 cents on the dollar is a excellent investment.

I have to ask what make you judge and jury on who is paid correctly? Just because one company pay a way you don't agree with doesn't make it an incorrect pay scale. For all we know OD driver are saying we are treated unfairly because we are forced to work the dock as drivers.
In one thread you are all about stock price and even said thats how you pay for new cars. Now you here bashing a company that is turning a very good profit and now there pure evil because in your eye they pay unfairly. If they are paying soo bad as you say then why is there not mass number of people leaving??? One night I talked to as LH driver out of there Carlisle Pa site. He told me that just at that one center they employ almost 300 DW. He also said even though we pay more, not being force to do dock work is worth it.

 

[Fly-by-night]

People are either safe or they aren't. I know plenty of city drivers that get time and a half after 8 that speed and do things I consider to be reckless. When I ask why, they say it's just the way my mind works. I'm sure most of you see guys that operate the way too.

You're saying the exemption should be removed for safety reasons, but I'm pretty sure you'd be against the government regulating how fast you can go, limiting the speed of all CMVs to 60 MPH. There are already laws in place to keep the commuting public safe. People either follow those laws or they don't.

T-Force cut there speed to 65 and safety was the last thing on the unions mind

 

[Fly-by-night]

Every legal requirement is skirted. Unfortunately an everyday guy can't pay millions to have attorneys on payroll combing through all of this text.

I agree with him to a degree, but nobody ever looks at the negative effects when legislation is changed on a whim. There is bad that comes with this and it shouldn't be ignored. I don't believe the positive outweighs the negative at this point in time.

Case in point just look at what happened to gas prices since biden got into office

 

[Fly-by-night]

This is a law that now causes workers to be legally exploited.

I didn't know we were a communist country were the govt told what and were you were working. It seem many don't understand when you accept a job you agree to the terms of that job. If you don't like the terms don't accept the job

 

[Fly-by-night]

Answer the question please

he did. by saying that the demcratic party didn't want to pay a fair wage to people of color

 

[Streaker69]

I didn't know we were a communist country were the govt told what and were you were working. It seem many don't understand when you accept a job you agree to the terms of that job. If you don't like the terms don't accept the job

Is he sending you creepy PMs too?

 

[icuicp]

Every legal requirement is skirted. Unfortunately an everyday guy can't pay millions to have attorneys on payroll combing through all of this text.

I agree with him to a degree, but nobody ever looks at the negative effects when legislation is changed on a whim. There is bad that comes with this and it shouldn't be ignored. I don't believe the positive outweighs the negative at this point in time.

I also appreciate the back and forth exchange of ideas. And the effort to try to "show your work" and apply logic.

Some try to politicize almost every debate ( even if it means they would hurt themselves ) by picking a side that clearly goes against regular , everyday working folks.

As far as the overtime exemption , when you go back on the history of it's implementation , you can understand why the "white collar and executive" exemptions are in place. In the beginning ( 1938 FSLA ) what would the REAL purpose of the exemption of transportation workers be? It couldn't have been to help the actual workers. To "protect" the companies?

To me , the potential pluses outweigh the minuses.

This is our legacy in the United States. If we can do better , we try to do better , not leave it broken because we are used to things that way.

 

[XCCX]

Just for transparency here is “my part” of a conversation I had with Streaker :

You don’t think for a second Sir that I haven’t dealt with your type and the agenda you tout.
I have been down this road a thousand times . The only reason you guys get any traction here is because these guys don’t realize how deep you guys go to steer public opion . I realize how vital this is to the guys who pay your bills but it’s just realize how important it is to the workers . Your guys are going to profit one way or another. These guys dont have that advantage.


If these guys didn’t lean so hard to the right your influence and the ones who fund you would be limited .
Just do me a solid and cut the ******** with me . You can have your say on any topic but just realize it doesn’t fool some of us.
Other than that have fun.

all the best
ov

I think it’s pretty clear that Streaker intent was some how trying to diminish my character by misrepresenting what I said In a private conversation. You can clearly see that I said know where that anyone was “stupid” or “Republicans are paying him”. Not sure what kinda of narrative he’s trying to push but he should at least be decent enough to correctly post what I say.

 

[Streaker69]

I also appreciate the back and forth exchange of ideas. And the effort to try to "show your work" and apply logic.

Some try to politicize almost every debate ( even if it means they would hurt themselves ) by picking a side that clearly goes against regular , everyday working folks.

As far as the overtime exemption , when you go back on the history of it's implementation , you can understand why the "white collar and executive" exemptions are in place. In the beginning ( 1938 FSLA ) what would the REAL purpose of the exemption of transportation workers be? It couldn't have been to help the actual workers. To "protect" the companies?

To me , the potential pluses outweigh the minuses.

This is our legacy in the United States. If we can do better , we try to do better , not leave it broken because we are used to things that way.

I don't know what was going on in 1938 and I don't know what the real purpose of the exemption is. Potential pluses are there, but I disagree on them outweighing the minuses. If this happened in 2018 or 19, I'd be all for it but things are bad and getting worse right now. It's also disingenuous to say that the supply chain shortage is because truckers don't get OT. It seems like nowadays everything is someone else's fault.

 

[Fly-by-night]

In the beginning ( 1938 FSLA ) what would the REAL purpose of the exemption of transportation workers be? It couldn't have been to help the actual workers. To "protect" the companies?

That exemption dates back to the 1930s and was originally enacted as a safety issue to keep drivers from working too many hours.