Working Families Flexibility Act - Coffee with Kenny

In this edition of Coffee with Kenny, I will be talking about the Working Families Flexibility Act that recently pass the US House of Representatives. If ultimately passed in the Senate and signed by the President, what would it change about the Fair Labor Standards Act with regards to overtime and comp time?


Coffee with Kenny is an ongoing video series from TEA President, Kenny Colbert. He discusses news, trends, legislative updates or just his thoughts on current events and their impact on the human resources profession. Please visit our YouTube channel to view previous videos.

Click read more for the transcript to the above video.

Comp Time Bill Stirs Controversy: May Message from the President

The US House of Representatives just passed a bill which could substantially alter the overtime pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.  The proposed Working Families Flexibility Act would allow non-exempt employees to receive compensatory time (also known as comp time/time off), in lieu of receiving overtime pay for working more than 40 hours in a workweek. 

The current version of the bill allows an employee to choose to receive either overtime pay, or to bank up to 160 hours of comp time for later use.  If the employee does not use the comp time, he must be paid-out within 30 days upon request, or by the end of the year.  As information, non-exempt employees who work for the government have been able to use comp time since the mid-1980s, but it is illegal for private sector employees to do so.

Advocates of this legislation say it will allow employees to schedule more time with their families to be involved in child care or school activities when the time is needed.  Others say this could give employees extra paid vacation time in the summer months when school is not in session.  Many employees in the construction business are in favor of the bill, because it would allow paid time off during the cold/wet winter months when work may be sporadic.

Those who oppose the bill claim that employers would no longer schedule employees to work more than 40 hours in a week, so employees would in essence take a pay cut (due to no overtime).   They also raise the concern that, since employers would have the final say-so on when the comp time could be used, employees would not necessarily be able to use the comp time when it was actually needed.  (Yet the employer would still have to pay it out if it was unused.)  Labor unions are not in favor of the bill, as they tout their ability to negotiate work schedules and pay/benefits for members.  Any type of mandated legislation related to flexible schedules would diminish their clout. 

The bill is expected to be heard in the Senate in the near future.  But there is little optimism that it will pass.  And even if it does, President Obama has said he will veto the bill. 

From an HR perspective, comp time has worked effectively for many years in the public sector.  The nature of when and where work is done has changed dramatically, as well as the make-up of working families.  The younger generations who have entered the workforce also place a higher value on workplace flexibility than those who have come before them. 

Our politicians should at least be willing to discuss the issue.  Maybe the House bill needs to be tweaked, and additional employee protections provided--but the issue should at least be put on the table for honest and frank dialogue.

Think about it.   Kenny L. Colbert, President

Note:  The Employers Association is a non-partisan organization.  Our purpose is to help employers build better workplaces.  Our Message from the President is intended to provoke thought and conversation about issues that impact employers.  Have a comment or a question?  Please leave it below!

Immigration Reform on the Horizon?: April Message from the President

President Obama and members of Congress appear to be finally getting serious about some type of meaningful immigration reform.  The focus is on three key issues:  (1) what to do about the 11 million illegal immigrants, (2) how to tighten border security, and (3) how to keep businesses from employing people who are here illegally.  Much of the conversation centers on if we should provide amnesty or a path to citizenship for the illegal immigrants; deportation does not seem to be an option on the table. The last serious debate was back in 2007; yet no laws were passed, due to divisiveness among special interest groups, and an angry public backlash.  What will happen now?

One big hurdle has already been conquered.  The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO, long-time rivals over political issues, seem to have come to an agreement on various proposal components.  The President wants to create a “Lawful Prospective Immigrant” visa that would allow those who are here illegally to become legal permanent residents within eight years, and they could later become U.S. citizens.  Controversy continues over securing the borders and tracking whether or not immigrants who initially come on legal temporary visas actually leave the country when required.  While there are still a number of issues to resolve, it appears we may see a final draft of the proposed legislation in the coming weeks.

Here are some interesting facts about the immigrants who are in our country:

• Estimates report that there are 40 million immigrants living in the U.S. (13% of the population).  18 million are naturalized citizens, 11 million are legal permanent or temporary residents, and 11 million are here illegally.
• In 1960, 47% of the foreign-born lived in the Northeast and 10% in the South.  By 2010, 22% lived in the Northeast and 32% in the South.
• Estimates state that 40% of the 11 million illegal immigrants did not sneak across the borders, but came here legally via tourist/student/work visas; yet they never left when their visas expired. 

The general public seems to be divided on how to handle the challenges of the immigration issues.  According to a recent Pew survey, 71% of Americans say there should be a way for illegal immigrants to remain in this country (either as a legal resident or through a path to citizenship), while 27% say they should not be allowed to stay legally.  Two percent had no opinion.

Those who support a path to citizenship say that our country has a history as a melting pot, where all should be welcome.  Some say we need the labor for certain industries.  Yet others feel that we cannot afford to educate, provide health care, and support jobs for this additional volume of people, with the high unemployment rate for our legal citizens, and health care costs spiraling.  Employers struggle with how to handle applicants and verify that candidates are authorized and legal to work in the U.S. 

So here is the question.  What would you do if you were in charge?  Do you try to deport 11 million people---or do you develop a workable solution to grant them some type of legal status?

Think about it.   Kenny L. Colbert, President

Note:  The Employers Association is a non-partisan organization.  Our purpose is to help employers build better workplaces.  Our Message from the President is intended to provoke thought and conversation about issues that impact employers.  Have a comment or a question?  Please leave it below!