Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from www.LaborLawCenter.com, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is the detailed difference between hourly and salry paid employess? Louisiana

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What is the detailed difference between hourly and salry paid employess? Louisiana

    What is the detailed difference between hourly and salary employees and must one fall under one of those categories under state law? Also who determines what category you fall under?

    thanks in advance.
    chm0dvii
    Junior Member
    Last edited by chm0dvii; 01-22-2007, 12:54 PM.

  • #2
    "Salary" is merely a pay method.

    Are you asking what the legal requirements are for exempt and non-exempt status? Federal law drives that and the pertinent law is the Fair Labor Standards Act.

    Comment


    • #3
      Ok I read the whole thing. What does this mean for me and others working as an exempt employee? What are the real differences between the two other than one being an hourly and other being salary and the issue of overtime?

      Does this mean that I have to be deemed salary or hourly by law? Or is the "blue collar" worker" the only one that must fall under the overtime/hourly category?
      If I am an exempt emlpoyee is there any benefit to this? One disadvantage is no overtime. But are there any real advantages?

      Comment


      • #4
        Let's get away from the terms hourly and salaried, shall we? They have little to no meaning under the law. What matters is exempt or non-exempt. While some people try to use hourly and non-exempt interchangably, and salaried and exempt interchangably, they are not interchangeable. In some circumstances a non-exempt employee can be paid on a salaried basis, and some (not many, but some) exempt employees are paid on an hourly basis.

        All employees are either exempt or non-exempt. This is true because there are no other options. They have to be one or the other because there is nothing else to be. Except unemployed.

        Any and all employees can be considered non-exempt. It is always legal to make an employee non-exempt. They can make Bill Gates or Malcolm Forbes non-exempt if they want to.

        Only an employee who qualifies to be exempt under the provision of the FLSA can be considered exempt.

        If you qualify to be exempt, you can legally be considered non-exempt. But if you do not qualify to be exempt, you cannot be considered anything but non-exempt.

        Is that what you're getting at? If not, please clarify.
        The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

        Comment


        • #5
          Yes that helps out a bunch. So, I am an exempt employee by the tests I meet, but if my employer wants to they can still make me a non-exempt. Ok, so what is the purpose of making someone exempt? Why are they not qualified for overtime? Also, does this mean if you are exempt that hours are scrutinized like a non-exempt? For instance, if I miss an hour of work due to going to the doctor, then does the employer dock and hour? If so, how can that be fair to us, as opposed to non-exempt overtime employees?

          thanks

          Comment


          • #6
            So, I am an exempt employee by the tests I meet, but if my employer wants to they can still make me a non-exempt.

            Correct

            Ok, so what is the purpose of making someone exempt?

            In my opinion, exempt employees are much easier to pay.

            What do you mean, what is the purpose? I"m afraid I'm not following you.


            Why are they not qualified for overtime?

            Because overtime is what you are exempt from.

            Also, does this mean if you are exempt that hours are scrutinized like a non-exempt?

            An employer may certainly "scrutinize" the hours of an exempt if they choose to. An exempt employee does not get to come and go as they please, but many of them mistakenly think so and tend to come in early/leave late and think that the employer can't do anything about it. They are wrong.

            For instance, if I miss an hour of work due to going to the doctor, then does the employer dock and hour?

            If he does, he's in violation of the law. With very few exceptions, an exempt employee has to be paid his entire weekly salary for every week they do any work at all. In a few, very limited instances, they can be docked for days they do not work at all (but only a VERY few instances); however, the ONLY time they can have their pay docked in partial day increments is if the time is attributable to FMLA.

            Now, the employer can insist that you take an hour of sick, vacation or personal time to cover that hour, but the employer CANNOT dock your pay for it, only your leave time. Unless it's attributable to FMLA.


            If so, how can that be fair to us, as opposed to non-exempt overtime employees?

            Since the employer can't do it, fair is a moot point.
            The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by cbg View Post
              So, I am an exempt employee by the tests I meet, but if my employer wants to they can still make me a non-exempt.

              Correct

              Ok, so what is the purpose of making someone exempt?

              In my opinion, exempt employees are much easier to pay.

              What do you mean, what is the purpose? I"m afraid I'm not following you.


              Why are they not qualified for overtime?

              Because overtime is what you are exempt from.

              Also, does this mean if you are exempt that hours are scrutinized like a non-exempt?

              An employer may certainly "scrutinize" the hours of an exempt if they choose to. An exempt employee does not get to come and go as they please, but many of them mistakenly think so and tend to come in early/leave late and think that the employer can't do anything about it. They are wrong.

              For instance, if I miss an hour of work due to going to the doctor, then does the employer dock and hour?

              If he does, he's in violation of the law. With very few exceptions, an exempt employee has to be paid his entire weekly salary for every week they do any work at all. In a few, very limited instances, they can be docked for days they do not work at all (but only a VERY few instances); however, the ONLY time they can have their pay docked in partial day increments is if the time is attributable to FMLA.

              Now, the employer can insist that you take an hour of sick, vacation or personal time to cover that hour, but the employer CANNOT dock your pay for it, only your leave time. Unless it's attributable to FMLA.


              If so, how can that be fair to us, as opposed to non-exempt overtime employees?

              Since the employer can't do it, fair is a moot point.

              Ok, so what is the purpose of making someone exempt?

              In my opinion, exempt employees are much easier to pay.

              What do you mean, what is the purpose? I"m afraid I'm not following you.


              What I mean is what is the purpose under law? Why does the law make these distinctions? What is the reasoning behind having exempt employees not be qualified for overtime? Also I am still a little confused about the docking of hours? If you are deemed exempt you cannot come and go as you please, but you said that the employer must pay the week work of salary no matter how much you actually worked? What do you mean by that? If I have to run and errand like renew my driver's license can they dock me for that? Also , can an employer just change your status at any time without notice? If I did go to the doctor and docked me anyway, what's to stop them from saying " Oh, we changed you to non-exempt. "

              thanks for clarifying a lot of this for me, this helps a lot of us out.
              chm0dvii
              Junior Member
              Last edited by chm0dvii; 01-22-2007, 02:11 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Since I wasn't sitting in the Congressional chambers when they established the laws (heck, I wasn't even born, and my parents were still in grade school) I can't tell you what the established purpose was in setting it up that way.

                If you are exempt, with very rare exceptions you get paid the same amount if you work 20 hours or 80 hours. You cannot be docked for running out to renew your drivers licence (but if you don't have permission to do so and your employer chooses to do so you can be disciplined in other ways). Your employer cannot switch you back and forth between exempt and non-exempt at their convenience. If they want to switch you to non-exempt they can - once. But then you're non-exempt and they have to pay you overtime. They can't switch you back to exempt the next week because you worked overtime and they don't want to pay it. If you qualify for exempt they can choose which status you have, but having done so they have to stick to it.

                You know, it would be a lot simpler if you'd just tell us what's going on.
                The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cbg View Post
                  Since I wasn't sitting in the Congressional chambers when they established the laws (heck, I wasn't even born, and my parents were still in grade school) I can't tell you what the established purpose was in setting it up that way.

                  If you are exempt, with very rare exceptions you get paid the same amount if you work 20 hours or 80 hours. You cannot be docked for running out to renew your drivers licence (but if you don't have permission to do so and your employer chooses to do so you can be disciplined in other ways). Your employer cannot switch you back and forth between exempt and non-exempt at their convenience. If they want to switch you to non-exempt they can - once. But then you're non-exempt and they have to pay you overtime. They can't switch you back to exempt the next week because you worked overtime and they don't want to pay it. If you qualify for exempt they can choose which status you have, but having done so they have to stick to it.

                  You know, it would be a lot simpler if you'd just tell us what's going on.
                  Thanks that helps out a bunch.
                  I just wanted to get this clarified because I surely did not know the law, and they may not be aware of it either. Know this only helps us all. I surely learned a lot from this site and will definitely point it out to my peers and family.

                  thanks again. Also can you please clarify my last questions? thanks
                  chm0dvii
                  Junior Member
                  Last edited by chm0dvii; 01-25-2007, 07:51 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I thought I responded to all your questions. Which one needs further clarification?
                    The above answer, whatever it is, assumes that no legally binding and enforceable contract or CBA says otherwise. If it does, then the terms of the contract or CBA apply.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by cbg View Post
                      I thought I responded to all your questions. Which one needs further clarification?
                      Oh sorry you did. The only thing I am still confused about is you said that if you are an exempt employee that doesn't mean you can come and go as you please, but they cannot dock you if you work 20 hours or 80 hours. Now does that mean they can discipline you for coming in late/leaving early/running errands without permission, but not dock your hours? Also, I just wanted to know why the government makes these distinctions? Why do they think that someone who is a computer engineer does not deserve overtime as opposed to the blue collar sort? Maybe because one is intellectual and the other is mainly hard labor?

                      thanks for clarifying.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by chm0dvii View Post
                        Oh sorry you did. The only thing I am still confused about is you said that if you are an exempt employee that doesn't mean you can come and go as you please, but they cannot dock you if you work 20 hours or 80 hours. Now does that mean they can discipline you for coming in late/leaving early/running errands without permission, but not dock your hours? Also, I just wanted to know why the government makes these distinctions? Why do they think that someone who is a computer engineer does not deserve overtime as opposed to the blue collar sort? Maybe because one is intellectual and the other is mainly hard labor?

                        thanks for clarifying.
                        Your example of 20 hours versus 80 hours gets into new territory. If you miss whole days for personal reasons and do not have leave to cover the time, you may be docked for the whole day. If you leave two hours early to hit the MVA, your employer may dock your leave bank, or discipline you including fire you, but they must pay you for the whole day. Essentially, if you are exempt, you can not be paid in less than full day increments. They may hang you from from toenails for not working full days according to their schedule, but they still have to pay you the same if you worked any portion of that day (absent the FMLA exception).

                        Since channeling the spirits of long dead Congressmen is not among my talents, I can only guess at why some jobs were allowed to be exempt and other not. For the most part, those that qualify as exempt are jobs that do not easily lend themselves to working only set hours. How much or little time it takes to complete required tasks is less easily quantifiable than with jobs that only qualify as non-exempt. Those who are exempt also typically have a greater degree of control over their schedules and workload as many by definition are managers or work independently. If someone else is directing their every task and dictating how they spend their time, they don't qualify as exempt. Sure there are exceptions, but on the whole this is the case.
                        I post with the full knowledge and support of my employer, though the opinions rendered are my own and not necessarily representative of their position. In other words, I'm a free agent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Since channeling the spirits of long dead Congressmen is not among my talents, I can only guess at why some jobs were allowed to be exempt and other not. For the most part, those that qualify as exempt are jobs that do not easily lend themselves to working only set hours. How much or little time it takes to complete required tasks is less easily quantifiable than with jobs that only qualify as non-exempt. Those who are exempt also typically have a greater degree of control over their schedules and workload as many by definition are managers or work independently. If someone else is directing their every task and dictating how they spend their time, they don't qualify as exempt. Sure there are exceptions, but on the whole this is the case.

                          See now that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying all of this for me. Now I finally understand the difference between the two categories!


                          thanks a whole bunch!

                          Comment

                          The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.
                          Working...
                          X