EAP Pre-Draft Proposed Rule Language (Second Version)

(Submitted on 12/27/18 by Randi Post, Klickitat County Human Resource Department)

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the department’s intention to propose raising the exempt salary threshold from 1.5 to 2 or 2.5 times the state minimum wage for a 40 hour work week.
Klickitat County Commissioners and the Human Resource Department wishes to encourage the department to retain the 1.5 formula since minimum wage will increase by 49% ($9.55 to $14.23 per hour) for the period of 2016 to 2020. This alone provides an increase to the exempt annual salary threshold from $29,796 to $44,398.

Currently, we have 62 full-time executives, administrative & professional employees who passed the duties test for exempt status and 188 full-time non-exempt employees. Our exempt employees are placed on Grades 67 through 76. Our starting exempt annual wage on Grade 67 is $48,298 and caps out at $62,982 after 12 years of service.

Should the department move forward with increasing the salary threshold factor to 2 or 2.5 on 1/1/20 10 to 45 employees will lose their exempt status. By 1/1/21 those numbers increase to 22 to 51. Only 11 employees out of 62 exempt employees starting wages may pass the salary threshold in 2021.
In addressing the minimum wage increases and the compression impact to our salary schedule we have increased salaries by 6% in 2016, moved exempt position up two grades for a 12% increase in 2018 and are providing a 5% increase in 2019.

In 2016, when DOL proposed dramatically increasing the salary threshold, we explored many alternatives to raise exempt salaries in a financially sustainable manner. There were no easy fixes. The Commissioners committed to increasing salary in a substantial and sustainable manner as mentioned above.

To meet the proposed exempt salary threshold at a factor 2 x minimum wage, we would need to increase our exempt salaries by 16% on 1/1/2020.

We do not exploit exempt status by giving assignments that routinely exceed a 40 hour work week. Our exempt status practice allows exempts employees to reduce their schedule when a project or time intensive program requires an increase in hours worked or provide additional compensation for long-term projects.

Please remember not all of the counties have above average income or housing cost. The most recent report in 2016 reflects the median income in King County as $84K, while Klickitat County is $51K. Median house value in King County is $491K, in Klickitat County, it is $225K. In a review of 2018 exempt wages, King County’s wages were 110%, or $7,343 a year, higher than Klickitat County.

While raising salary thresholds may not impact counties with a higher cost of living, it would have a devastating impact on rural counties.

Perhaps using a formula similar to how the State per diem rates are determined, you can design a plan that is more than one dimensional (see attached). We are proposing the “yellow” counties retain the 1.5 factor.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Siao Lou Kent)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Siao and I live in Kent. I've worked as a associate manager at a retail store for 1 year.

I am urging you to restore overtime rights so that everybody paid less than $100,000 gets overtime pay when they work overtime hours

I do not understand why I even need to explain the need of restoring overtime rights. Workers should get paid for their time and their work, this is the MOST basic right that workers deserve.

if employers have to pay time-and-a-half when employees work over 40 hours, they will try very hard to not have their employees work very long hours, then there will be less workers injure themselves on the job because they are exhausted from work.

On behalf of Seattle Opera, we agree the current salary threshold for exempt status is outdated and should be updated. However the proposal by the State of Washington of 2 – 2.5 times greater than the state minimum wage is too high, and would negatively impact our operations and programs we offer to our communities.

We propose the State implement a salary threshold between $42,000 to $47,476 (the 2016 proposed federal salary threshold). We further propose that this level could be pro-rated to include part-time exempt employees. And we support a phased-in approach to implementation over 3 years. It is administratively burdensome to have a salary threshold move each year and we suggest a flat rate that could be in place for a minimum of 5 years.

We agree with the language proposed by the State to better align the States’ duties tests in as many ways as possible with the Federal duties test.

We support Washington State’s effort to review and adjust exempt level salaries, but propose that the salary threshold is a better match with our exempt employees’ current minimum salary ranges.

As a nonprofit organization that is already struggling to raise the funds to carry our mission we are very concerned about the regulations being implemented as planned. It would cause us to need to raise between $75,000 and $475,000 more each year.

The other thing to consider is often our staff work non traditional hours and we allow flexibility for exempt employees to be able to have a better work/life balance. By increasing the number of non-exempt employee is would be much more difficult to have that flexibility. Our staff depend on a steady paycheck and working less hours as a non-exempt employee in the “lighter” weeks would not be financially feasible for most.

Please take all of these things into consideration.

Respectfully,

Nancy Del Villar Vivé, SPHR, SHRM SCP
Seattle Opera Human Resources Director

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Carolyn Brotherton, on behalf of UW Postdocs United/UAW Local)

My name is Carolyn Brotherton, and I’m a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Washington. I’m also an elected member of the bargaining committee of our recently formed union, UW Postdocs United/ UAW Local 4121.

Postdocs and research scientists at the UW do the cutting-edge research that makes the UW one of the top research and teaching universities in the country. We also contribute to the state’s economy and the wider pubic good, through the creation of intellectual property, starting spin-off tech companies, and more.
Despite these contributions, and the fact that we have doctorates and other advanced degrees, we are a low-paid workforce. Most postdocs currently make around 48k per year. About half of UW postdocs are rent-burdened, postdocs qualify for certain low-income housing in Seattle, and postdocs who are parents seriously struggle to pay for childcare.

Researchers routinely work more than 40 hours a week. The phrase “Science isn’t a 9-to-5 job” is something we internalize early on in our careers. Science often demands that we work long hours and on the weekend.

While we may love our research, we strongly reject the idea that the love of a job is sufficient reason to steal our labor. We call on L&I to raise the overtime salary threshold to the highest level under consideration: 3 times the state’s minimum wage. We favor implementing these changes in January of 2020 with no phase-in period. Furthermore, we support a single, state-wide standard for all of Washington’s workers.

We’ve seen from recent history that adopting higher pay standards improves the lives of researchers.
In 2016, when the U.S. Department of Labor was considering raising the salary threshold, University administrators warned that the increase was unreasonable, and would lead to massive tuition increases and layoffs.

At that time, the typical postdoc salary was below 48k. When the 2016 overtime rules went into effect, the UW quickly raised the base pay for researchers, and the foretold layoffs didn’t happen. In fact, the number of postdocs at the UW has increased in the last five years.

Now we hear familiar arguments against raising standards from the UW, including that tracking the salary threshold with the minimum wage will create “budgetary uncertainty.” However, the state minimum wage is increasing in a predictable manner that the UW, and other businesses, can plan for.
The UW has also made an argument that a “too high” threshold would mean that Principal Investigators, faculty who run labs and are the main supervisors for researchers, would become overtime eligible. They argue that this would be illogical--akin to small business owners becoming overtime eligible. However, this is a spurious argument, as the average salary of professors at the UW is already above $100 thousand, which is clearly above L&I’s highest proposal.

Within the academic research community, we prefer to have the investment of our time reflected in a base salary raise. But it’s clear that workers in different fields may prefer overtime compensation for additional hours. Either way, workers’ time is properly valued. This is an issue of fairness—we know that the money is there, but the priority to treat workers fairly isn’t. Let’s fix that. The workers of Washington state deserve higher standards to protect our time and our livelihoods.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Michael Perdomo-Connot)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Heath and I live in Seattle. I’ve worked as a hospitality manager for 10 years.

I think if you’re paid less than triple the minimum wage (about $75,000/year) you should be paid when you work overtime hours.

I want to restore overtime rights as a matter of principle. I would also like to be compensated for time spent away from my family.

This change the work environment for the better. Salaries employees and team members would fee more valued and have a better work-like balance.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Travis Wallace)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name isTravis and I live in Longview. I have worked as a electrical supervisor for 2 years.

I think if you work more than 40 hours a week you should get overtime even if you are salary.

L&I should restore all OT, 40 hrs or more, for everyone that works. Make life better for everyone. Less stressful and lower health care premiums for lower stress employees will save everyone money and sanity.

If employers would include overtime for salary personal, it would make a safer happier environment for all.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Randolph Grein)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Randy, and I have lived in Bellevue for 31 years.

I would like you to restore overtime rights for workers who should not be exempt – around $75,000/year.

My entry to IT began my intro to ‘exempt’ status. For a long time the trade was equitable – I was advancing fast, learning and with a few job hops began to receive adequate pay. I even became known well enough to start writing – before the tech crash of the late 90's and the rise of the Internet eliminated much of the compensation for tech writing. But I missed a lot. Both my kids were born with dad dropping off work a few hours before the birth and fitting in visit and return to home around work. My wife had to return to work within 2 weeks (graveyard) and we typically didn't see each other during the week except to hand off the kids – me to sitter, sitter to her, her to me.... . We managed, but only just. I was young, strong and did fine on 4-5 hours of sleep. Not everyone can do that, and when they try output suffers. They suffer. And so do their families. Salaried positions, especially on the lower end are often dressed up as ‘the tough stuff before getting to the money’, as if the hard work and loyalty will eventually convince employers you deserve more. It doesn't work that way. It's really just a way to extract a few more hours out of people who are going to be terminated in the next downsizing anyway. At the very least they should be paid for the work they do now. Thank you.

Funny things happen when workers are paid what they are worth, and that includes overtime pay. Kids get to see their parents. Workers get to enjoy life, rather than living to work. And oddly enough, it boosts the economy by paying people for contributing to company profits. It's pretty basic, really.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Mark Alan McConnell)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Mark McConnell. I live in Marysville and I’ve worked for Boeing for over 34 years. As a manager for over 32 of that.

I believe the 1st level managers should be paid for overtime worked.

When I begAn my management career with Boeing, I earned OT at the same rate as the hourly workforce. It was one of the reasons I took the job. It was a promised benefit. Later they reduced our OT compensation to rate + $6.50. There was no negotiation, just an edict from above. Later they removed OT pay completely even though management OT is required as we have crews working virtually every weekend and holiday. This company has continued to take away from its employees while enjoying record profits. The days I work without pay, it costs me money to go to work. I pay to drive in, lunch away from home, and 12 hour shifts away from my family. No pay, no comp time, nothing. And in my opinion a breach of contract since I originally took the job with that pay promised.

It’s just fair. I would hope that it might encourage the company to make better decisions with regards to OT worked. I don’t want to work OT and lose time with my family, but if required to I want to be fairly compensated.

The company is getting bigger, stronger, and more profitable. That’s good for everyone. Just be fair with the workers.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by David Joe Mead)

Dear Director Sacks:
My name is David and I live in Battle Ground, Washington. I’ve worked as Network Support for 5 years.

I believe that it is time to restore overtime rights to anyone that is paid less than triple minimum wage (about $75,000 a year) insuring that they are paid overtime pay when working overtime hours.

Over the years I have worked as salaried a employee for most of my life, and have at times been forced to work 75 – 80 hours a week which at the time meant I was was making less than minimum wage. My current job is not as unforgiving, but there is no telling when I may have to work in such situations again, and how many people are currently in that same situation.

If employers properly compensate their workers they will get better quality of work and the abuse of salaried employees will end. This will allow employees to be able to spend more time with family and employers may have to hire more staff, but will have the staff that is not overworked to give quality work.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Dayv McKernan)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Dayv McKernan and I’ve lived in Washington my entire life. I’ve now worked as a skilled tradesman for 20 years.

Overtime should be based on a daily basis and paid at a rate of time and half on any hours over 8 not just a 40 hour work week.

L&I should enforce these ovetime laws, moreover they need to require overtime pay for all workers to be paid on hours beyond or exceeding 8 hours on a daily basis. If an employer requires an employee to work beyond a normal shift the employee should be compensated appropriately with overtime pay after 8 hours of normal work.

If an employer is required to pay overtime to its employees there are several outcomes here. One is that it would increase employment or two it would create a better sense of production as the employees would be more willing and vested.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Alec James Brock)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Alec, I've lived in Washington my whole life (currently Tacoma). My partner and I both work in customer service/retail. I've been doing so since my first job (2008), and my partner has been a salaried manager for longer than he's lived in Washington (5+ years).

As a constituent, I urge this state to raise the overtime cap. I believe the cap should be set to the COST OF LIVING for THREE individuals (two adults and a child). If you make enough (or more than enough) to afford your partner being able to stay home to raise a child, only then should you be exempt from receiving time and a half when you work in excess of 40 hours.

Overtime rights should be restored because it's a matter of justice, equity, ethic and our social fiber.
It us completely unright that large, corporate business can essentially access slave labor by forcing their, competent, higher-payed employs to work excessive hours without receiving additional pay for their work.
Every holiday season (the biggest time of the year for loved ones to be near, and coincidentally for corporations to reap a profit), I watch as my partner is expected to work up to 90 hours a week, getting paid only cents on the hour after he hits overtime.

Let me clarify: he does not earn his hourly equivalent PLUS some cents per hour, he earns only pennies for every hour he works after 40, until his average equivalent hourly wage hits minimum wage, at which point he begins receiving minimum wage for each hour (this kicks in somewhere around 110+ hours). For every hour my partner works over 40, his hourly take home pay drops. He is punished for putting in the extra effort he doesn't have the option to not put in, while the business which employs him makes more profit than ever (and not just due to the practically free labor they squeeze out of managers). Businesses are more than aware of their ability to take advantage of salaried employees below the overtime cap and they do so--this is reprehensible and the state must put an end to it.

By increasing the overtime cap, employers would be forced to treat their employees fairly in terms of work output vs pay by preventing them from taking advantage of being able to pay $0 per man hour. Employers would either have to pay their employees a fair living wage for their average nuclear family in exchange for the option to expect that employee to output as much work as two employees, or give more hours to current employees or hire additional employees. This simple and fair act of requiring the large, greedy corporations to actually pay people accordingly for their time would help close the widening income gap, provide families with more time together, and abate American workers' growing work-induced anxieties.

Large corporations will go on and on about how they'll have to cut employees due to increased expenses, or some other poppycock about not being able to make increasing the overtime cap work. This is simply not the case as it is anytime businesses are threatened with having to pay workers fairly. As long as a business is proftable, it's the people who actually do the work for that business that should receive the fruits of their labor and employees don't tend to work overtime in unprofitable businesses (at least not blue collar, salaried-under-$75,000 range employees).

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Janet Peterson)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Janet Peterson and I live inRichland. I started working at age 14 many of those years in the restaurant business. I was paid minimum wage Amy husband as management was paid a salary. He worked 50 plus hours a week with no overtime

If you are paid less than 3 times the minimum wage you should receive overtime. Employers otherwise take advantage of the low salaried worker

L & I should restore overtime rights to ensure the salaried worker is being fairly compensated for their overtime work

Things will change because a worker earning salary and working over 40 hours a week will be compensated. It will. Help families pay for daycare and ease the burden of providing for their family

Low paid salaried workers are being taken advantage of especially in the food and retail industry

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Eric Chatham)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Eric and I live in Sammamish, WA. I have worked in Technical Software QA for over 10 years.

I'm urging you to to restore overtime rights so that everyone paid less than triple the minimum wage (about $75,000/year) gets overtime pay when they work overtime hours.

Because too many salaries workers are being exploited in the tech industry with low salaries and intense hours.

If you restore these rights, it will end worker exploitation and potentially put more moving money back into our local economy when people are paid fairly for their extra labor.

So many in the tech industry are being exploited by under $75K salaried positions.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Katherine LaVergne)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Katherine LaVergne and I live in Sammamish, Washington. I have worked as a game tester for 6 years.

Unpaid overtime is basically slavery

L&I should restore overtime rights because slavery is illegal.

If employees are paid for the overtime they work, they will be able to do all those things you take for granted. Like pay their bills, take care of their kids, and save up to take some much needed and deserved time off.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by William S. Thompson)

Dear Director Sacks:

I live in Skagit county and I've worked as an electronics technician and engineer for the first 30 years of my working life and as a home care homemaker for my disabled adult daughter for the last 20 years.
I believe that an hourly wage earner should be paid overtime for any hours worked more than 8 hors in day and/or more than 40 in a week.

Any person, especially those at low hourly wages who works overtime hours is deserving of overtime pay in order to make ends meet better and as a reward and as an incentive.

The working person's famuly with an hourly wage would be better off financially and the state would attract better workers.

A wage earner should be paid overtime wages for their overtime hours.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Lauren Hausner)

Dear Director Sacks:

For the last ten years I've been working as a professional artist and server (because all artists need a second job). In just 48 hopes I will be making the leap into the corporate world. While I am thrilled and happy and getting a good salary, I won't be making overtime. My effective hourly rate will halve, and I'm not the only one.

Restoring overtime to low paid salary workers is vital. The restaurant industry is a perfect example of the problem with no overtime. An hourly shift lead in both FOH and BOH can go from $25 to $30 an hour to a $60K salary with 10 hours a week mandatory overtime. It is crushing, either you advance your career or you have a life. Protections are necessary. As an accountant I understand the cost of this decision. And while it maybe an unpopular opinion, I'm okay with comprise. Salaried workers often enjoy the luxury of choosing to work more hours one week and less a layer week. They also often work in environments with uneven workflow.

I urge you to find the necessary comprise that brings OT back to so many who are effectively wage slaves.

I live in downtown Redmond, in a complexfiled with short term housing. Most of my neighbors are here from Indian or China on 18 month contracts. The diversity and change is great. I love my neighbors, but this business practise comes at a price. They come here and work 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, and don't get paid that much. While many are well in the 6 figures, many are young, fresh out of school, and make closet to $50k. And while there are technically laws that prevent this, their willingness to work so many hours, is pricing out Americans who want the same job. The Americans are just unwilling to work those hours in perpetuity. Restoring overtime would help Americans get jobs that don't suck.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by David W. Smith)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is David Smith and I live in Seattle. I am a Union electrican and feel that everyone should be afforded the the rights that we have been fighting for for so long.

I'm urging you to to restore overtime rights so that everyone paid less than triple the minimum wage (about $75,000/year) gets overtime pay when they work overtime hours.

My girlfriend is currently working as a salaried manager and is expected to work a minimum of ten hours a day, and frequently more, for as many as 12 days in a row. As a union electrician, it kills me that her company is legally able to take advantage of her like this and something needs to be done about it.

If labor and industry’s would restore the OT rights to everyone it would force companies to realize that their employees are more than just a tool to use until it breaks and then be replaced. These employees are people who deserve 40 hours of work, 40 hours of rest, and 40 hours of recreation ever week. If they want more work than that, they should be forced to pay a priemum penilty wage!

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Karl Peterson)

Dear Director Sacks:

I am Karl Peterson, and I reside in the Snohomish area. I have been employed by Frontier Communications as a salaried manager since they purchased the Verizon assets in 2010. I was employed by Verizon prior to the acquisition for 5 years as both hourly and a salaried employee.

I used to be a strong advocate for the “salary exemptions”, however, I have also seen firsthand how employers take advantage of the savings. I do not think my employer or even most employers deliberately do so, but it happens nonetheless. I think 3 times the minimum wage is not enough of a threshold in today's economy. I currently make between 3-4 times minimum, and regularly can be expected to “do what it takes”, meaning a typical week is 50-60 hrs, and during storm season or other busier times I can hit 80 hrs in a week. My union hourly employees typically exceed my annual wage yet I put in far more hours at what would be a higher hourly rate (based on 40/wk). I think the state of Washington should look at a couple options. Perhaps 5 times minimum if the state prefers to keep the threshold purely wage based. Another option would be to include overtime wages for first-level supervisors who have one or more hourly employees, as regardless of industry these workers are expected to start before their teams and leave after.

I think companies in most industries have five overtime payments by creative employee classifications. This is very apparent in the IT industry as the average worker would be the equivalent of an hourly worker in any other industry, but instead are treated as white- collar. I have seen my own employer reduce or eliminate union hourly positions, to eventually replace with “white collar” salaried folks performing the same function. As a first line Construction Manager, I am certainly not an executive, however, I am classified as a white collar worker. I work 50-60 hrs per week to live up work for my teams, field projects, perform safety and quality inspections, and countless other tasks. I am also expected to be on call 24/7 every other week for after hours emergencies, which can lead to an additional 10-20hrs of work, and no sleep.

Unfortunately, 3 times minimum will not include most folks like me, because my wage is slightly above. By making it 5 times and possibly including some language regarding supervisors of hourly employees, might help incentivize employers to better staff and to not continue to take advantage of the lower levels of management employees.

I think it would immediately cause employers to revisit staffing models as they recognize the amount of hours their “white collar” employees are actually logging. Many IT, Engineering, Retail, and service industry entities will have to weigh OT costs versus additional full time equivalents. I think within a year hiring would be stimulated to add additional managers or headcount to avoid the expense of time-a-half payments.

I think this legislation would be a bit short- sighted if a hard look at how employees are defined as exempt or hourly. I think any employee who has hourly or union employees directly reporting to them should also be entitled to overtime wages. Too many employers are putting the burden of the business on the shoulders of the lowest level salaried employees.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Michael Polodna)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Mike Polodna and I live in Olympia. I’ve worked for the state government for 28 years as a professional engineer.

I’m urging you to restore overtime rights so that everyone paid less than triple the minimum wage gets overtime pay when they work more than 40 hours per week.

In my work with the state, overtime eligibility is based on job classification instead of pay. Typically classifications that require education or professional licensing are not eligible for overtime pay, while classifications without those requirements are eligible even when they are paid the same base pay. For example, a Construction Project Coordinator 2 and an Environmental Engineer 2 make the same base pay and can do very similar work, yet the CPC2 is overtime eligible while the EE2 is not.

Many educated engineers leave state employment for better paying jobs in private industry. If they were eligible for overtime pay like their colleagues with no educational requirements, they may stay with the state instead of using it for training purposes and then moving on.

Many jobs in private industry and the state are classified as “management “ for the sole purpose of avoiding overtime pay. This is wrong and needs to be corrected.

(Submitted on 12/31/18 by Shannon Hughes)

Dear Director Sacks:

My name is Shannon and I live in Ballard. I’ve worked as a musician for two years.

I’m urging you to restore or time right so that everyone paid less than tripled the minimum wage gets overtime pay and they work overtime hours

It is a basic principle that if someone works more than theie agreed-upon hours they should get compensated extra

I believe compensating people for overtime will increase their desire to work, their ability to work, and their quality of life