Benefits of being exempt

Does anyone have a good concise statement to tell employees who are now classified as exempt under the new standards and will lose overtime as to what the benefits of being exempt are (other than the obvious no deduction from salary except for certain circumstances.)???

Comments

  • 12 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • MS HR: Great question! We don't have anyone who will fall into that category. I expect there are very specialized individuals and it will be interesting to read their HR explanations. Not having to punch a time clock might to some be considered a plus, but then I have always been an EXEMPT person so I have little room to preach what the value might be; I have not lived in their shoes and do not know what it is to be paid for the many, many long hours beyond 40 that I have worked. I have never been off the clock, when the company needed me, I had to go and have never drawn a dime for the extra time spent accomplishing the mission.

    I will for this thread click my gong to read the following!

    See you Monday, I am out of here!

    PORK
  • One thought, you might want to title it as "Explanation of Exempt Status", as opposed to benefits of being exempt. I don't know why, but it struck me as a something that could create problems. I would approach it as what it means to be non-exempt and what it means to be exempt - base it on the federal regulation and not some perceived "benefit" to either status. (after all, what someone perceives as "benefit" is in the eye of the beholder!)x;-)

    To your general question, I would include the explanation that being exempt means the position is not subject to various provisions of the FLSA - tracking hours for pay purposes. Instead, employees are now paid a fixed, set salary per work regardless of the actual hours worked. Here is some verbiage from dol.gov:
    "Being paid on a “salary basis” means an employee regularly receives a predetermined amount of compensation each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent, basis. The predetermined amount cannot be reduced because of variations in the quality or quantity of the employee’s work. Subject to exceptions listed below, an exempt employee must receive the full salary for any week in which the employee performs any work, regardless of the number of days or hours worked."

    I would be careful about trying to say that an exempt employee could work 6 hours each day and still get paid for full 8 hours, because you could get into some performance issues and resultant discipline.

    As I type all of this, I guess what I'm really trying to say (though not very well! 8-| ) is I wouldn't try to "sell" this change. Instead, I would explain what it means to be exempt without a lot of hoopla. You could end up making it seem worse if they think you're trying to sell something that each person may not perceive as a great thing.

    As a side note - I may have one or two exempt positions that need to be changed to non-exempt and am concerned about potential negative reaction because of perceived "status" associated with exempt positions. If it's not one thing, it's another!x:7
  • AJ: I concur with your approach! Make it a "positive learning experience" rather than a "selling experience". Talking to the record keeping requirements for "hours worked". The same should be true of your circumstance; if the current EE is salaried and is concerned about punching the time clock give that person the option (temporary for a couple of weeks) of recording the time worked on a time card in written format verses printed format. After she/he gets the good feeling of the O/T $ollar the fear and the pain will vanish.
  • At this point - I can't think of a single benefit of being an exempt employee any longer. I have a four-year degree have worked 20 plus years and have worked on a constant basis in excess of 45 to 55 to 60 a week and not been compensated nor rewarded for all of the extra time.

    In my current position - as an HR director for a company of 110 employees (manufacturing and sales company) I acutally make less than the hourly workers who cut sheet metal and install our products - as they make a lower hourly wage - but get paid OT every single week - to the tune of thousands of dollars a year that I will never see. I am salaried and exempt - and also must must punch a clock to make sure I work at least 40 hours a week - required.

    So there are no benefits to being exempt. I am unclear why there are any exempt positions - as those benefits dried up a long time ago. There is no such thing as lunch on the clock - it is off the clock and sometimes not all. If you go to the doctor it is off the clock - you are paid - but also made to feel like you've done something wrong by leaving during the day.
  • Benefits? no, I'd rather be hourly.
  • Can't you lose your exempt status by punching a clock and counting hours?
  • nope.
    an employer can require clock punching as a matter of documenting that an employee did any work that day.
    the only prohibition is docking from pay.
    you can dock from accrued leave.
    just don't dock from pay. (and even then in certain circumstances it is ok.)
  • Turbo, from a fellow Texan...

    If you are required to "punch a clock..." as an Exempt employee...your exempt status has just been nullified unless the company can show significant reasons for this requirement.

    Review the standards.

    With that said, this is not unusual in small or closed corporations.


  • Reading some of these replies, I see why there is no "advantage" to being exempt. My employer is different. They recognize that exempt employees work in excess of 40 hours per week. They are not required to punch a clock or justify their time to anyone. If they need a few hours off,they take it without any type repercussions. If they have a docs appt., they do not have to deduct it from anything. If they occasionally take an afternoon off, they are not charged PTO time.

    On the other hand hourly employees are free to abuse the time clock as much as they possibly can. They drag out daily tasks they should be able to accomplish in the course of a day, so they are sure to have overtime at the end of the week. They order lunch in and eat at their desk without punching out. They play the game at the beginning of the day and the end of the day and milk the clock to the tune of several hours of overtime a pay period. We have caught people who have punched out on their lunch break - stayed an hour, clocked back in and then gone to the break room to eat lunch. These are just a few of the ways that abuse of time costs employers thousands of dollars a year.


  • I've had a couple of bad experiences being an exempt employee for most of my work life, but to me, being exempt has meant a lot more than being exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA. I never cease to be amazed at what I read on a board which is for HR professional employees. If this is how WE think, how must our employees feel?

    My exempt status has meant a lot to me, including being exempt from: watching the clock; mundane, repetitive work; many of the rules which govern hourly employees' lives; a supervisor looking over my shoulder all the time; most exposure to on the job injuries; being tied to a machine or work station, etc, etc.
    It means having responsibility for making decisions, using my brain, being involved in the well-being of my organization, making a profit when I was in the private sector. If you cannot appreciate these advantages, then you probably shouldn't be in an exempt position.

    OK, I'll get off my soapbox now.
  • Very well said, Hunter, and I am in complete agreeement. My feeling is that since I gotta work I might as well enjoy what I do and that simply would not be possible if I had the kind of job that paid by the hour.
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-25-04 AT 12:08PM (CST)[/font][br][br]But, wouldn't it be nice if we COULD be paid by the hour??
Sign In or Register to comment.