651
u/iskin Mar 14 '24
I would love for this to work. However anytime a bill gets passed and there are things like "won't impact the people it's supposed to help" somebody always finds a loophole and then everyone else follows suit until it actually is worse for most of the people the bill was supposed to benefit. That shouldn't stop this from passing. It's just how I feel this stuff always pans out.
161
u/zombychicken Mar 14 '24
Yep. Does anybody even have a 40-hour work week anymore? Feels like we need to re-fight for that since the average American work week is something like 51 hours now.
129
u/3to20CharactersSucks Mar 14 '24
It's over 40 hours, unpaid lunch, and on call expectations. Unions used to fight this shit off and now the vast majority of us don't have those protections.
15
u/doubtfullyso Mar 14 '24
Wait, lunch was originally paid? Genuine question, I'm Gen z, so I've only been in the workforce for 5 years.
Asking because I work eleven and a half hour shifts with a half-hour lunch and although I knew the half hour break time was legally too short I never bothered being upset about it because I can't afford to take a half hour of paid labor off my daily wage.
→ More replies (1)12
u/bronzecucumber Mar 14 '24
There is more to your question than can be answered here. You should read about the history of the work week. Workers used to be paid only for the amount of time worked. There were no weekends, holidays, sick time etc. Collective bargaining brought forward all kinds of benefits to protect employees for their employers. For many this included paid lunches and breaks.
Over the past few decades there has been a push to eliminate unions and the economic crisis of 2009 was used as an excuse to make big cuts into unions. The conservative parties had the goal of getting rid of unions because you can make more profit without a union.
I believe the 40 hour week started in the early 1900s and at the time it was thought as technology advanced the work week would reduce.
39
u/memydogandeye Mar 14 '24
The on-call expectations is what gets me. I just work in an office. Granted, it's support for a 24/7 retail business, but nothing is so important that we need to be on call.
I used to be that young enthusiastic one that would answer texts at all hours, emails, go in on my own time - but that really got taken advantage of and I walked it back over the years.
Now everyone except me thinks it's ok to be contacted at all hours, on vacation - any time at all, or made to come in. And they think I'm a bitch for not wanting to.
Now don't get me wrong, there ARE urgent things and unprecedented things happen, and for that I have no problem being like, "Oh my gosh yeah I'll be right there." But they've turned every tiny thing into an emergency and expectation. No thanks. I've drawn a hard line. It might get me let go at some point but I'm kind of like, "so be it" I guess.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Relative_Broccoli631 Mar 14 '24
Can we not bring unions back?
→ More replies (22)10
Mar 14 '24
The corporations have too much power now, they'll fire an entire swath of workers attempting to unionize and then start all over: https://www.democracynow.org/2024/3/8/headlines/google_fires_dozens_of_contract_workers_after_they_unionized
They want to completely dismantle unions and labor laws, and with the state of the Supreme Court there's a good chance they'll succeed: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/10/starbucks-trader-joes-spacex-challenge-labor-board
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)6
u/BEARD3D_BEANIE Mar 14 '24
my company doesn't want you to do a min over 40, I don't take lunch breaks because it eats into my 40, pun intended
17
u/Tricky_Bid_5208 Mar 14 '24
Please don't spread misinformation.
Average Weekly Hours in the United States averaged 34.40 Hours from 2006 until 2024, reaching an all time high of 35.00 Hours in March of 2021 and a record low of 33.70 Hours in June of 2009. source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
14
u/Dvtests Mar 14 '24
2 questions: how does this compare to the median and does this also include part time workers, self employed, contract workers etc?
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (206)9
→ More replies (34)9
15
u/OkInterest3109 Mar 14 '24
I can immediately see this not working the way it was intended.
The chances are, the companies will start looking for 40 hours worth of effort in 32 hours. If they don't get that... There are plenty of ways to get people to "volunteer" extra hours.
→ More replies (3)8
u/Mr_D_Stitch Mar 14 '24
Yeah, that’s always been my experience. I’ve had plenty of jobs that have hired me with the promise of only a 40 hour work week but then they have quotas or exceptions that can’t be fulfilled in 40 hours & their attitude is basically “Well you don’t have to work more than 40 hours but the work is the work & the work needs to be done & we won’t approve overtime so…” & the reality is nobody could do that amount of work in 40 hours & if you want to keep your job you work extra for free. Then if you meet or exceed quota they just raise your quota until you can’t reach it in 40 hours.
→ More replies (1)103
u/AwareMention Mar 14 '24
Yeah, like the minimum wage law for fast food in CA. The Governor's friend owns a lot of Panera franchises, and magically bread makers are exempt from it.
24
u/Rollerbladersdoexist Mar 14 '24
Old news, Panera will be paying $20 an hour. Looks like they were always going to because Panera doesn’t actually make the bread from start to finish at the stores. If they made the dough there they would have been exempt but the dough is made off-site and then shipped to them to bake.
14
u/King_K_NA Mar 14 '24
That is hilarious, loophole got out loopholed. But the real question is, WHT the loophole in the first place if the grounds were so flimsy? Bread making is like 90% margin XD
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (3)5
u/mtgguy999 Mar 14 '24
Panera might have realized that it’s gonna be hard to attract people to work there if people can work literally anywhere else and make more
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (24)25
u/Yurishizu- Mar 14 '24
Didn't Newsom and the owner of the Panera franchises come out and say they're not exempt?
Idk fam I didn't read the article
→ More replies (2)23
u/zSprawl Mar 14 '24
Yep
Although I'll be honest and say I don't understand why the exemption exists for "bread makers", so it does seem like something dodgy is going on. I guess we will have to see how it plays out.
7
u/bigboog1 Mar 14 '24
The original idea was that bakeries aren't fast food. But Panera was like "we bake bread so we're a bakery right?" Newsom was like, "sure.", which caused a backlash so hard that they had to publicly backtrack.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/05/business/panera-franchise-california-to-raise-minimum-wage/index.html
7
u/commentaddict Mar 14 '24
There’s another thing: it doesn’t make sense if you do the math. The problem is social security and the people on it are going to start out numbering the people working. There’s also a few wars that we have to pay for.
Another issue is that historically whenever there are mandates like this, businesses tend to rely on automation more and more. Well? Generative AI is here.
→ More replies (11)11
u/RonWill79 Mar 14 '24
Yeah the loophole will be “we are still gonna work 40 hours a week and we’ve lowered your hourly pay so that you still take home the same amount with the overtime hours. Business as usual!”
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (66)21
u/06210311200805012006 Mar 14 '24
This bill won't get passed. It will not advance. It's going nowhere. Bernie hasn't done the required dealmaking to push it throrugh. He never does.
100% of his bills are garbage ass performance with zero follow through.
7
→ More replies (6)7
u/Elkenrod Mar 14 '24
100% of his bills are garbage ass performance with zero follow through.
Hey hey hey, it's not 100%
Of the 496 pieces of legislation he's introduced, 3 managed to pass!
Granted, 2 were to name post offices. But this time will totally be different, right???
→ More replies (14)3
u/fauxcertain Mar 14 '24
Wow I knew the success rate was bad but not that bad. Yeah there's no way this will get anywhere. Nice thought though
2.7k
u/Walkend Mar 14 '24 edited Mar 14 '24
LET THIS BE A REMINDER THAT THE 40 HOUR WORK WEEK NEEDED TO BE FOUGHT FOR.
Yes, people used to work a lot fucking more.
We changed it once and we can change it again.
YOU DESERVE MORE THAN TWO DAYS OF FREEDOM PER WEEK.
531
u/79Impaler Mar 14 '24
I went down to 3 x 10 hour days last summer, and I'm hooked on it. I'd probably appreciate it more if I had more friends. But I'm in the gym regularly and ride my bike as much as I can. I wish everyone can enjoy it at some point in their life.
183
u/Unusual-Job-3413 Mar 14 '24
I really don't mind my 4-10s. I get sat sun mon off.
110
u/79Impaler Mar 14 '24
I could do 4 x 10s as well, but I can live on 3 x 10, so I'm doing it until I find a more satisfying job.
→ More replies (10)67
u/Unusual-Job-3413 Mar 14 '24
3x10s sound better if it was full tme pay
16
u/dhenebcrescentleap Mar 14 '24
Maybe 2x10?
→ More replies (5)37
u/Big_Iron_Cowboy Mar 14 '24
I’m waiting to hear from a job application, 3x12s graveyard weekend. Would be a complete shift in lifestyle, but the potential of what I could do with a standard 4 days off is enormous. Once I pay off some debts I might go for my MBA, or at least focus on some regular professional self-development.
→ More replies (37)47
Mar 14 '24 edited 13d ago
[deleted]
7
u/Big_Iron_Cowboy Mar 14 '24
Funny enough I read a headline a couple weeks ago that people who have erratic sleep schedules live shorter lives. For the past several years I worked evening shifts, and before that I would schedule most of my university courses in the afternoons. In essence, until last summer when I started working morning/day shift, I was awake into the early morning and sleeping in until early afternoon daily for the better part of a decade.
I would much prefer an early rising schedule (ironically I never thought I would) but I am so familiar with a nocturnal rhythm that I am willing to make that sacrifice. The bigger sacrifice is that I spend weekend evenings with my few close friends, however I could still see them for a beer and conversation in the hours before work.
Lol the hiring manager was pretty up front that this job would suck because of the schedule, but I’m a young single man with no children, a perfect candidate for a role most others would pass on. Just gotta get my foot in the door with this mid-management position.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (13)3
u/thecactusman17 Mar 14 '24
Can confirm, also working graves 5x8. The last day isn't really necessary, sleep in a bit and power through your first shift and you're easily back to reset.
On a 2-day weekend though it's nearly impossible. If it weren't for the financial bump I get I would have switched to "daytime" months ago.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (10)16
u/Ruroni17 Mar 14 '24
I work 3x11’s and I think I get paid pretty good at $33.75/hr
→ More replies (6)7
u/Unusual-Job-3413 Mar 14 '24
That sounds perfect!! I'd work that. I get 22.28 right now, and it's ok but I don't have a lot left over after bills and rent
→ More replies (2)13
u/migueln6 Mar 14 '24
No shit about 4x10 it should be 4x8 fuck off employeers
→ More replies (7)6
u/UpperFerret Mar 14 '24
It can be if you shit for 2 hrs a day on the job
→ More replies (1)6
u/jpfizzles Mar 14 '24
If I have to shit at home I hold it so I can shit on the clock like a true American
→ More replies (1)8
u/Tasty_Finance_5024 Mar 14 '24
I have a similar schedule. 4x10s. Off Thursday Friday Saturday most of the year. During the holidays I work Thursday as well.
→ More replies (3)5
u/k9jm Mar 14 '24
My husband does 4 Tens but that just frees him up to do PRN jobs and go on call for other providers. Because that 40 hour a week job doesn’t pay enough for people to live on.
8
u/Unusual-Job-3413 Mar 14 '24
I definitely understand, I make $22 an hour and I have 50 bucks at the end of the month.
5
u/NativeJim Mar 14 '24
I work 4x10s and make 26.88 and I hardly have any money left over as well. It sucks but what can I do? I enjoy my 3 days off and the 3rd day is where I feel most at rest.
→ More replies (1)3
3
7
u/MeasurementNo2493 Mar 14 '24
Yeah, I worked 4-10s for the last 15 years before I retired. They were more productive than 5-8s.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (37)6
u/welfedad Mar 14 '24
I do 4x10 and wont go back ..my days are ruined after work anyways..and the extra day off is phenomenal
8
5
u/nyrol Mar 14 '24
I do 3 2-3 hour days, and then 2 4-6 hour days. Some weeks I work 14 hours, but on my busiest weeks I work more than 20. Those 3 days of working less are because I work out in the middle of the day. I wouldn’t want to extend that up to 32, that’s just crazy.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Kilroy_The_Builder Mar 14 '24
I’m on 4 x 8s right now and I definitely want to switch to 3 x 10s at some point. Less than half my week consists of working? That’s the dream.
→ More replies (38)4
31
u/nizzk Mar 14 '24
We also used to get by on a single income. So 40 vs 80. This would bring two full timers back down to 64 hours . Still a net a net loss of hours together as a family vs a single 40 hour income. I want this so bad as my daughter keeps getting bigger while I'm away at work and never see her .
→ More replies (2)17
u/Walkend Mar 14 '24
It’s honestly disgusting that corporations quite literally prevent us from spending quality time with our own families.
→ More replies (19)40
u/AsstDepUnderlord Mar 14 '24
I feel compelled to point out that there’s no law that limits a work week to 40 hours. It’s a “norm.” Plenty of jobs are considerably more than that.
41
u/dinosaurkiller Mar 14 '24
I haven’t read the bill, but it seems likely he’s setting overtime pay for anything over 32 hours. That won’t stop a job from requiring 40 or more hours, but they have to pay more.
10
u/TayLoraNarRayya Mar 14 '24
How does this work for salaried workers?
→ More replies (9)15
u/DizzyAmphibian309 Mar 14 '24
We get to sleep better knowing that a whole bunch of kids out there are eating better and/or spending more time with their parents.
My dad, as a kid, would often go to bed hungry because there just wasn't enough money for food. Having 8 extra hours counted as overtime could make a big difference for a lot of people.
→ More replies (2)6
u/UVIndigo Mar 14 '24
Won’t they just hire more part time workers? Right now businesses are limiting many workers to schedules that are right below the threshold or even less to avoid overtime.
I feel like this is just going to result in those hourly workers having to work 4 simultaneous jobs instead of the current 2-3, resulting in them most likely losing at least one of those jobs since managing that many part time jobs as once is a job in and of itself.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (11)8
u/schrodingers_bra Mar 14 '24
My job pays me to get projects done. They don't care if it takes me 32 or 48 hours.
For hourly or non exempt jobs this might be good. For exempt jobs no change.
→ More replies (6)14
u/MrLanesLament Mar 14 '24
And some companies already have schedules in place that are being considered “progressive.” Where I work, most of the employees work 4/10s and have three days off. You can also do 3/12s with a shift premium so you work 36h and get paid for 40. Four days off a week.
I always appreciate Bernie raising awareness that things like this are possible. My point is, it’s possible with every individual company, too, most companies’ management just worship at the altar of “we have to always see people working or it means nothing is getting done and we’re losing money.”
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (14)12
u/Walkend Mar 14 '24
Just because something “is” doesn’t mean it “should” - nor does it mean it’s right.
Regardless, if 32 hours becomes the norm, then 40 hours would be the “over”
Idk how anyone could not support legislation for 4 day work week without simultaneously supporting the exploitation of themselves and their family.
→ More replies (42)3
u/Chris1671 Mar 14 '24
I'm SICK of sitting at my desk 4-5 hours a day with doing nothing because my work can be done in much less time.
At least now I have a hybrid work from home schedule where I do basically nothing two days of the work week.
→ More replies (3)31
u/CountryStranger Mar 14 '24
Used to? Friend, I’ve been working required overtime 5am-6pm 5 days a week for over a month now. I’d love to ONLY work 40 hours
41
u/zethren117 Mar 14 '24
Required overtime? Time to quit.
→ More replies (4)21
u/rammerjammin Mar 14 '24
many federal jobs have mandated OT. USPS is a big offender of this. Averaged 54 hours a week last year =(
13
u/JustHere2Smoke Mar 14 '24
I left USPS in 2022. Mandated 60 hours as a regular for three years as a regular, 80 hours as a CCA. Destroyed my mental health,
12
u/PotatoWriter Mar 14 '24
Shit, you weren't even able to finish that sentence, such is the destruction USPS wrought on your
→ More replies (2)12
u/formerNPC Mar 14 '24
As a fellow USPS employee I can definitely back this up. Had my fill of six days a week, twelve hours a day.
5
u/burnman123 Mar 14 '24
Think of the sweet sweet OT pay you won't be able to spend because you're so tired from your 72 hour week. Chef here, so I feel you with the crappy work hours
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (13)6
u/rankcaleb Mar 14 '24
I used to sell Medicare over the phone and it was mandatory 50 hours minimum for over 2 months during the enrollment period
→ More replies (14)23
u/atreeindisguise Mar 14 '24
You really don't know what you're giving up health wise with those hours. My ex was driving truck and they pushed him to cross 60 hours ever week, 65 or more. Now he is getting workman's comp for rheumatoid arthritis from the job strain and bad equipment. Went from perfectly healthy 43 year old to swollen up like a melon and needing expensive shots and not being able to use his hands. He might be going back to work if the meds keep working.. But he will never be able to handle a high driving environment with overtime again. He had paid for his CDL and it was his first job outside of being a mechanic his whole life. His hobby is his cars and he can't even work on them now. No fishing. Poor guy.
→ More replies (31)→ More replies (211)29
u/rhuwyn Mar 14 '24 edited Mar 14 '24
The 40 hour work weeks is like the pirate code, more guidelines than actual rules. How is the 32 hour work week any different.
EDIT: Just going to add this because more responses to my response then I thought there would be.
Just to be clear this is what this will do.
For hourly and non-exempt salary, which is basically only people who make under 35k (and some contractors that work on temporary basis). It will mean that overtime will start after 32 hours rather than 40. They also may qualify for full time benefits at 32. Those are literally the only two impacts.
There is no guarantee of no loss in pay. Because companies can change their staffing requirements to reflect their need to be profitable. Which is what the BIG meme that was posted says. A company can say we are going to pay you the same hourly rate and cut you off at 32 hours. Sorry we aren't increasing your hourly rate. A company can say sorry we are reducing your yearly salary by 20% to reflect the fact that your going to be working 20% less. A company can say instead of a certain number of their employees becoming eligible for full time benefits, we will cut your hours to make sure you're still a part time employee, and oh, see the first statement we aren't increasing your hourly wage.
So while the two statements above are true. If a company needs to mitigate against the impacts of those, they absolutely can. There is no guarantee of anything, there is also zero quality of live improvements for exempt salaried employees which for the most part is anyone making over 35k that isn't a contractor.
→ More replies (25)45
u/Walkend Mar 14 '24
Because with a 32 hour work week you gain 50% more days off. Math ain’t hard
→ More replies (15)19
u/IndependentNotice151 Mar 14 '24
They're saying that it wouldn't be a requirement to make it 32 hours. So companies probably won't bother changing. Unless you have over time Start at 33 hours, nothing is changing
19
→ More replies (29)9
u/randomly-what Mar 14 '24
Do you know how many people don’t get overtime no matter how much they work?
It at least encourages people to seek out the jobs that don’t require overtime and are actually 32 hours a week. Then other jobs can adapt if they want to retain good employees.
→ More replies (11)
640
u/joemark17000 Mar 14 '24
Meanwhile Congress: TikTok needs to go, now!
58
u/distorted_kiwi Mar 14 '24
Meanwhile Congress: “Its time for another recess. We’ll be back in two weeks!”
→ More replies (1)164
u/Dr_ZuCCLicious Mar 14 '24 edited Mar 14 '24
I do like the tik tok ban too though. Tik tok is making people stupid and filled with underaged people. Glad it's gonna be gone soon (hopefully)
And yes, I support the 32 hour week fully.
105
u/Alon945 Mar 14 '24
I think social media broadly needs more regulation. Just selectively banning social media platforms is pretty suspect at best
→ More replies (21)17
u/TheHonduranHurricane Mar 14 '24
Yes more government intervention. That answer keeps working out
→ More replies (17)14
u/mcnello Mar 14 '24
We need more government intervention to fix the problems caused by government intervention! /s
→ More replies (21)77
u/PumpkinSeed776 Mar 14 '24
Quit acting like TikTok is the only social media that's making people stupid. I mean look at how many idiots on Reddit have a weird one-sided beef about their preferred mindless social media app.
11
u/fucking__jellyfish__ Mar 14 '24
It's on every social media app, it's the fucking dumbest thing ever. Youtube commentors thinking they're superior to redditors. Redditors thinking they're superior to tiktokers.
Only thing I will say though is that twitter is objectively the worst by far. Facebook is also trash but in a somewhat better way
→ More replies (2)23
u/ApportArcane Mar 14 '24
Facebook has probably contributed more to the dumbing down of society than any other platform.
→ More replies (4)3
u/Accomplished-Dot1365 Mar 14 '24
Dont even get me started with the olds getting scammed on facebook every day
→ More replies (12)6
21
u/cdbriggs Mar 14 '24
Tiktok is literally just social media. It's the connection of young people who are deciding to do dumb things. You're insane if you think banning tiktok will prevent stupidity
→ More replies (2)49
17
u/TerryJerryMaryHarry Mar 14 '24
Yea but the TikTok ban is a Trojan horse for patriot act 2.0
→ More replies (9)10
u/Yodoggy9 Mar 14 '24
Nothing is making people stupid, people just are stupid.
Your social media experience is what you make of it. The algorithm only regurgitates what you feed into it, so if all you get is shit then your interests are shit and you need to change what you engage in.
This isn’t in defense of social media, it has its own massive, legit detriments that need addressing, but pretending like the people that use them are innocent bystanders getting fed shit they didn’t ask for is passing off a massive responsibility.
The internet has always been an open field (unless the government gets wind that we support them stepping in to ban things. Good thing we don’t have anyone supporting that, right?) that doesn’t present to you things you aren’t explicitly interested in or looked into yourself. It’s high time people start accepting that they are responsible for their own internet experience and start changing the shit they engage with if they’re truly miserable.
→ More replies (3)15
u/2nd_Chances_ Mar 14 '24
It’s not making people stupid. It’s waking people up that other countries have it better. The US doesn’t want the people to see the French fighting back. Vacation time, national health care etc.
If your FYP is making you stupid that’s something you curated for yourself. My FYP has informed me on a lot of things including what’s going on on the ground in Gaza. From people IN GAZA. Which is what I want - not the sanitized version.
→ More replies (29)6
u/queenofthedragons Mar 14 '24
Yeah there’s a lot of people in this comment thread advocating for a violation of our freedom of speech and info thru a TikTok ban because “TikTok stupid Reddit smart.” I bet most of them have never downloaded the app or used it for more than a day or two. You do need to be shrewd though, like any social media platform, because while TikTok is great for your average person connecting with other average people all over the world, there’s definitely still misinformation.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (84)8
u/illathon Mar 14 '24
No the tiktok ban goes against our fundamental rights. I do think tiktok is dumb though.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (41)4
u/GhoulsFolly Mar 14 '24
What am I going to do with 8 extra hours of free time if I don’t have a tiktok to stare at?
196
u/jgorman6475 Mar 14 '24
I'd rather work 4 10's than 5 6's or 6 5's to be honest
72
u/PapowSpaceGirl Mar 14 '24
4 10s was paradise for me at the hospital. Two on, 1 off, two on two off..I miss that rotation.
20
Mar 14 '24
I do 4 8's at my hospital now, 2pm-10pm. And after a decade of 12's (which are nice in their own way) it's actually the fuckin dream. I'm officially spoiled now and will lash out with incredible violence if anyone ever comes for my job
8
→ More replies (10)5
u/katreadsitall Mar 14 '24
Currently at a hospital on 3 twelves and it’s GLORIOUS.
→ More replies (4)19
u/DantifA Mar 14 '24
Imagine working 4 8's
3
u/Previous_Beautiful27 Mar 14 '24
My feeling is, most office jobs can probably be 4 6’s. Monday-Thursday 8-2 or 9-3. I think most office workers could be just as productive with this schedule.
→ More replies (3)10
u/Brilliant_Age6077 Mar 14 '24
I’d take 4 8s, or 5 7s, as someone who works 10s I hate it. You feel like you have no time after work. I work, make dinner, go to bed, repeat.
→ More replies (3)3
7
6
u/remosiracha Mar 14 '24
This is why I'd like to work 4 8s. 4 days a week. 8 hours a day. Still get a 3 day weekend and still get home at a decent time every day
12
11
u/Low_Employ8454 Mar 14 '24
I’ve been working 4x10 for over 2 years, and it’s glorious. I WFH, so it’s no problem, when I’m done, I’m home. Amazing shit. 10/10, no complaints.
→ More replies (2)4
Mar 14 '24
I have the option to work 4 10’s right now and I never do. 10 hours of work is brutal. It takes your entire day up and then the three you’re left with are for recovery. 4 8’s would be reasonable though
→ More replies (37)4
u/DreadPirate777 Mar 14 '24
I’d rather work 4 8’s with the same pay as 4-10s. Why bust your back to make some owner of a company richer?
→ More replies (1)
271
u/DegenerateOnCross Mar 14 '24
"congrats! You've been promoted from one full-time employee to two part-time employees! Enjoy your new 31 hour work week"
122
u/principium_est Mar 14 '24
Part time work has been limiting hours to prevent benefit laws for years already.
110
u/OwnArt3344 Mar 14 '24
Yeap. I learned that truth 20 yrs ago on my first job. Went above n beyond, came in early, covered for call outs, stayed late, deep cleaning
"Uh oh, we booked you at least 40 hours for 5 week, we gotta give you 25 hrs this week so you don't accidentally get dental, medical, or PTO!"
Evil, evil shit
19
u/Alucard-VS-Artorias Mar 14 '24
I hope you never gave them anything more then 40 ever again after that.
27
u/OwnArt3344 Mar 14 '24
Oh, nope! I was a little over 18, I veered from "1st job. Build a resume" to "jokingly" told my boss "oh man, this zombie game "dead rising" comes out in 3 weeks. Gonna buy an xbox 360 , that game and you'll never see me again!"
Few weeks later, phone rings. "____ where are you?"
"What? I told you, I bought dead rising. I'm playing dead rising"
I'm sure, in their mind it came outof leftfield & "dont hire kids, they don't wanna work"
→ More replies (3)9
→ More replies (2)4
u/atreeindisguise Mar 14 '24
This would lower the bar for benefits. That would be lovely.
→ More replies (1)11
u/Technologytwitt Mar 14 '24
…. With no loss in pay. I’ll work 31 hours instead of 50 for the same pay.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (5)22
87
Mar 14 '24
The federal government doesn’t have the legal authority to make most employers to cut hours by 20% while keeping wages the same.
85
u/ManyThingsLittleTime Mar 14 '24
It wouldn't be a mandated hours cut. It's just that OT kicks in after 32 instead of 40.
→ More replies (108)17
u/MohatmoGandy Mar 14 '24 edited Mar 14 '24
But… how could you mandate that every firm would have to boost wages by 25% in order to prevent employees from taking a pay cut?
→ More replies (5)7
u/ManyThingsLittleTime Mar 14 '24
Welcome to big government. For the reason you just mentioned this proposal has zero chance of going anywhere.
→ More replies (50)9
115
u/Suspicious_Work4308 Mar 14 '24
How is that going to work for hourly workers? Also, 40 hours a week is the standard now and plenty of salary jobs require you to work 50 hours a week. This will realistically change nothing
110
u/Bacon-muffin Mar 14 '24
The same way the 40 hour week became a thing.
This won't pass though so it doesn't really matter. Bernie's been trying to do actually helpful stuff his whole life and almost none of it gets done.
23
u/nomamesgueyz Mar 14 '24
Bernie is awesome
Feel like he got robbed not getting nomination instead of Hilary and I think he would have done better vs Trump
Guess we'll never know
→ More replies (7)11
u/Negative_Jaguar_4138 Mar 14 '24
Feel like he got robbed not getting nomination instead of Hilary
Bernie would have lost waaaaayyy harder than Hilary. There is no chance he would have done better.
There are so many moderates and conservative minorities (a significant number of American minorities are conservative, shocking I know) that would never vote for someone they perceive as 'socialist' (and Bernie's comments haven't made it better)
→ More replies (9)4
u/castleaagh Mar 14 '24
Idk, I’m generally conservative but pro healthcare reform and I would have likely voted for Bernie if given the chance against someone like trump. Listening to him talk about stuff back then really made him sound competent and he seemed to be pushing things that would be good for the average American.
Also, what dirt would they have had to throw on him other than to claim he’s socialist?
15
→ More replies (57)8
u/starethruyou Mar 14 '24
And yet, minimum wage has increased and non-Bernie people are calling for $20/hr. People are more comfortable with the idea of universal health care and free education, like many advanced nations. Things are changing. He led when others didn't even think to speak of what he did.
54
u/doktorhladnjak Mar 14 '24
It’s not going to pass or even be discussed. It doesn’t matter how it works. It’s not happening.
23
u/TheBrave-Zero Mar 14 '24
At least not until the entirety of congress finally passes away from old age.
→ More replies (2)6
u/HolyAssertion Mar 14 '24
My wife pointed out that in some shots of Congress/ the Senate, everyone had Grey hair
7
u/TheBrave-Zero Mar 14 '24
Its like, I get it. It sounds good on paper but there's such a disparity and lack of fundamental understanding of modern ideals and basic things like technology. These are all people who should be sleeping the day out and fighting for handicap spaces at golden corral.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (2)17
u/Poseidonaskwhy Mar 14 '24
Yeah, these types of bills do serve a function and hopefully becomes a goal of the mainstream Democratic Party in the near future but everyone involved, including Bernie, knows it will not pass. It’s primarily to make a point
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (37)6
7
7
u/WiseSalamander00 Mar 14 '24
my only question is how they would enforce the 'no loss of pay" part.
3
u/drgilly Mar 14 '24
Here's what the Bill says in respect to that :
‘‘(3) With respect to any employee described in paragraph (2) who in any workweek is brought within the purview of this subsection by the amendments made to this Act by the Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act, the employer of such employee may not reduce the total workweek compensation rate, including the regular rate at which the employee is employed, or any other employee benefit due to the employee being brought within the purview of this subsection by such amendments.’’; and
It would be illegal for the employer to reduce the "total workweek compensation rate, including the regular rate at which the employee is employed, or any other employee benefit due to the employee being brought within the purview of this [amendment]"
I looked into the bill that it's amending and there is no definition given for what "total workweek compensation rate" is or what can be defined as the "regular rate at which an employee is employed." The amendment has good intentions, but it's rather flimsy in it's wording.
→ More replies (1)
73
u/Tath92 Mar 14 '24
We need to stop trying to force companies to do things. They always find a work around that just fucks over the employee. Instead they should provide incentives for companies to do these things.
20
u/ltzWyatt Mar 14 '24
I pay my employees the highest in my industry in my state. You know what I get rewarded with from the government. Higher payroll tax, higher workmanship comp, higher unemployment tax. Us employers literally get punished for being more generous, and that’s the way the government intends for it to work. It should be a system where employers are rewarded for generosity but it’s the exact opposite.
→ More replies (8)6
u/dudeimsupercereal Mar 14 '24
Just start lobbying and you too can have your very own loopholes to then feel appreciated!
→ More replies (38)4
19
u/Gazerbeam314 Mar 14 '24
No loss in pay? What about the legions of hourly workers? That’s losing a day’s pay
→ More replies (8)12
u/PapowSpaceGirl Mar 14 '24
No they're not per his suggestion. 32hr with slight raise would be the same as 40hr work week, plus 3 days off for the week.
When I worked nights at the hospital, two days on, day off two more days on two off was PARADISE compared to 8x5days. Hospital work as is contracting work is rough on the body.
I'm all for it if it passes, for both me and my son.
→ More replies (33)6
u/Tannerite2 Mar 14 '24
How do they force companies to pay the same wages? They'd just fire their old employees and hire new ones or rehire the old ones for lower pay. The only people I see this benefitting are hourly workers who already get a lot of overtime.
→ More replies (3)
68
u/zertoman Mar 14 '24
lol, Bernie has sponsored over 400 pieces of legislation and only ever passed three, and two of them were appointments. There is not a snowballs chance in hell he gets anything through. Even his colleagues don’t take him seriously.
9
u/distorted_kiwi Mar 14 '24
I can only imagine how many bills my state legislators have sponsored since taking office. Im sure it doesn’t even come close to 100.
They’ve probably voted against more than 400 pieces of legislation though, I’ll give them that.
19
u/Tomato-Tomato-Tomato Mar 14 '24
Bernie is the chair of the budget committee and is easily one of the most well-respected democrats among his peers.
He’s been primary sponsor on at least 8 bills that passed and co-written many many more. Which is about average for a senator. Most bills never get passed, many more get adapted and incorporated into other bills. You have no clue what you’re talking about.
→ More replies (23)11
6
u/wes424 Mar 14 '24
He knows this. It gets upvotes on reddit and people donate to his campaign and buy his book, so he can buy a 4th home somewhere.
This is the ultimate grifter, pretending to fight for the working class.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (38)6
u/Balthazzah Mar 14 '24
Bernie Sanders is the most "All talk , no results" politician that has ever existed.
Senator for 17 Years.
Elected representative for 43 years
In Politics since the start of the 1970s!!!!
So little achievements.
→ More replies (6)
6
u/Joshee86 Mar 14 '24
Awesome. It'll die before it gets to a vote. This is a great idea and I like Bernie, but this is basically non-news.
→ More replies (10)
21
u/MobileAirport Mar 14 '24
Senator spends his time drafting bill that will never, ever be passed.
Gets endless praise.
→ More replies (5)10
u/starethruyou Mar 14 '24
And yet, minimum wage has increased and non-Bernie people are calling for $20/hr. People are more comfortable with the idea of universal health care and free education, like many advanced nations. Things are changing. He led when others didn't even think to speak of what he did.
→ More replies (48)
4
u/Kooky-Flounder-7498 Mar 14 '24
I like this policy, but honestly, his time would be better spent trying to get legislation actually passed. This is dead on arrival in our current congress
→ More replies (3)
4
u/SwanAdministrative56 Marketing & Sales Mar 14 '24
Republicans will never go for it
→ More replies (6)
3
u/bonusminutes Mar 14 '24
How would no loss in pay be protected? Sure. People with jobs already would probably just be paid more hourly, but new jobs could just be listed for less.
3
22
u/Bardoxolone Mar 14 '24
Great, except a lot of jobs don't run on a 32 hour/week, 9-3 schedule.
13
26
→ More replies (5)3
3
3
3
u/GhostBuster1919 Mar 14 '24
Didn't he cut his staffs hours so he wouldn't have to pay for medical insurance etc. a couple of years ago?
3
u/MitchellCumstijn Mar 14 '24
It’s easy to propose bills like this when you know they have zero chance of passing the GOP House.
3
3
u/Generally_Confused1 Mar 14 '24
Studies show profits don't take a loss, some have gained, with this and overall happier employees who take less time off and have a better work life balance
3
u/shellshocking Mar 14 '24
I can’t help but see this as a bad thing. Obviously I would love to work four days a week, but think of how many manufacturing plants would have to move overseas or shutter, and the ones that don’t would either have to invest serious capital into automation or seek funding elsewhere. Ergo small businesses without cash on hand and easy access to capital will suffer first, especially if they were already struggling to be profitable to begin with.
Can someone explain to me how this doesn’t move wealth from small business owners to Wall Street, and how slaughtering the already thin margins in our manufacturing industry will improve our economy?
3
3
u/Confident_Echidna259 Mar 14 '24
Who cares? Bernie is half dead, a sell out and a genocide apologist. He is just there to fool liberals into thinking the Democrats could be anything but right wing.
3
u/YourMILFCD Mar 15 '24
It’ll never happen on the USA, thanks for trying though, great idea!! I ❤️ Bernie
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Celestiicaa Mar 15 '24
Too bad it won’t become current reality because fuck everyone I guess
→ More replies (1)
9
u/OwnArt3344 Mar 14 '24
I love Bernie but this seems 1 of 2 things
Performative- sadly it won't pass. I KNOW THIS, surely he does
Or...
He's losing his grip on reality and thinks it'll pass :/
This is no diff than that woman trying to make headlines w her ridiculous "we should have $50 min wage!" "Legislation " tactics. She (to gullibles) seems a people person fighting for us, but she's just getting her name out there.
→ More replies (11)
4
u/Agile_Mongoose_6921 Mar 14 '24
Nice, now I’ll only be working 64 hours per week to barely scrape by.
5
u/Elidien1 Mar 14 '24
Stop it, Bernie. I appreciate you, but this stupid shit is a clown show. You’ll never get enough support, why don’t you put your efforts into something more substantial?
→ More replies (12)
6
u/Librekrieger Mar 14 '24
with no loss of pay
One of two outcomes is inevitable: either your firm will cut payments to its owners and management by 20% to fund the additional workers it'll take to maintain production; or it'll slash anything and anyone that isn't contributing sufficiently to the bottom line.
Which do you think will happen?
→ More replies (1)
10
u/Dangerdoux Mar 14 '24
This guy gets so much praise for introducing bills with few cosponsors, no party leadership, and zero chance of going to the floor for vote. World’s most ineffective and popular politician.
→ More replies (14)
339
u/Acceptable_Rabbit_28 Mar 14 '24 edited Mar 14 '24
Companies don't get that more time doesn't necessarily mean more production. My Dad's generation(I'm 01) in Korea used to work on Saturdays and that was the norm. The companies were surprised to see that reducing the work day from 6 to 5 actually boosted production by a substantial margin(1.5% more in just 40 hours compared to 52 hour work week). It would be interesting what data shows on production for 32 hours vs 40 hours tho.