I get paid every 2 weeks.

If i work 43 hours the first week in the pay period, and 40 in the second week, i earned 3 hours overtime.

But when i get paid, i get a check for 80 hours straight time. and won't be paid for the 3 hours overtime until i get paid again, 2 weeks later..

I asked mgmt about this and was told, "yeah were always behind on figuring out the overtime"

Is that legal?

Also second and third shifts are held to an attendance policy, IE 2 attendance points per 1 day missed, and termination if 8 points are accumulated. Points are removed at a rate of 1 half point per 30 consecutive calender days provided no time is missed in those 30 days, otherwise that 30 day count starts over, But First shift can call off whenever they please, and don't get any points.

Also second and third shift are required to punch out for 30 minutes for lunch (taking lunch is optional), but again first shift employees can take a 30 minute lunch and get paid for it.

And these policies apply to hourly non-exempt employees.

Anything illegal here? Any suggestions? (besides quitting) ty in advance.

That sounds fine to me. How many days after the end of the pay period do you get paid?

Even the most arguably employee-friendly state of California allows for overtime to be paid on the following pay period's pay check.

pay period ends sunday, or 12 am monday, patday is friday.

Hmm nothing wrong with selective enforcement of policy?

Especially attendance? I'm sorta thinking if i reach 8 points and get fired, then i'll just get Unemployment benefits, I'd think a judge would frown upon something like that, if it ever went to an appeal.

You said nothing about selective policy. It would be much more work for the payroll person to do it for some people and not for others, and that makes no logical sense. Having said that, however, unless the "selective treatment" was based on a protected characteristic of yours, it wouldn't be illegal. Or does the "selective enforcement of policy" have to do with attendance?

What does this have to do with attendance? Or is that a different question?

I'm confused.

sorry for the confusion. Yes i was trying to convey 3 separate situations that are taking place at work.

the first was the overtime being held so long.'

the second was the attendance policy only being enforced on 2nd and 3rd shifts,

1st shift employees do not get points for being late or calling off.

and the third subject was, again selective enforcement of policy,

2nd and 3rd shift have to punch out if they want to take a 30 minute lunch...

First shift employees do not have to punch out to take a 30 minute lunch.

This is causing me a lot of stress at work, hard feelings, and overall low morale.

I'm guessing the answer to the question, are these practices legal, will be .

"theres no law against it", ok i can deal with that, but in the event i should be terminated for refusing to punch out for lunch, or getting too many attendance points.... would i have a good shot at getting unemployment benefits?

Again, unless there is a union contract involved specifying how attendance points are to be given, there is nothing illegal about the shifts being treated differently. Not all employees, nor all shifts, need to have the same work rules.

YOUR work rules are that you punch out for lunch. So why would you refuse to? If you are fired for failure to adhere to the legal instructions given by your supervisor, you'll have an uphill battle getting UI.

Ok thanks.. Time to call the Local Teamsters and get some union cards signed..

BTW, I checked my source and it specifically states that overtime may be paid on the following pay check.