EAP Pre-Draft Proposed Rule Language (Second Version)

(Submitted on 12/17/18 by Mike Kerbs, Brad Stewart, Maverick Shimic, Josh Hooker, Scott Stephens, Kris Abhold, Shawn McAdams, Kenneth Groh, Tony Shaffer, and John Tschirgi - Rosauers)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/17/18 by Jeff Philipps, Rosauers)

I am the President of Rosauers Supermarkets, headquartered in Washington state. Within the last couple of years we have seen more cases where the state labor laws differ from the federal laws or those of our local cities and towns. As such, It is becoming increasingly challenging to manage payroll processes to ensure accuracy. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers AND employees, duplication of effort, a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules and more labor to manage it all. Margins in the grocery industry are infinitesimal to begin with. We don't need additional pressure based on conflicting regulations.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and upper management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/17/18 by Kevin Stormans, Stormans)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories (SEL) is an 100% employee-owned company headquartered in Pullman, Washington. We have more than 5,200 employees in 100 offices across the globe with nearly 2,500 in Washington State alone.

SEL places a high value on our employees who come to work each day making electric power safer, more reliable and more economical for people around the world. With our unique ownership structure, our employees own their careers and own the company. Above all else, we value the professionalism each individual creates in support of our mission.

SEL appreciates the Department of Labor and Industries’ (L&I) recognition that standardizing the duties test to that of the federal standard provides businesses of all types a level playing field across jurisdictions and eases the burden and complexity of compliance with multiple standards.

Of greatest concern about the proposed salary threshold adjustments is the loss of flexibility that our SEL employees currently own. With a proposed adjustment to 2 or 2.5 times the state’s minimum wage, approximately 200 SEL employees will be negatively impacted.

Many of these employees are in entry to mid-level professional and supervisor roles such as recruiters, associate engineers, accountants and manufacturing floor supervisors. Inherent in these careers are a known and modest level of variability in the hours worked. Employees in these types of functions are provided and require the flexibility to manage their workload to create a desired parity in managing their life commitments. Should the proposal be enacted, these employees will be returned to “punching a clock.” A task many have worked diligently to advance beyond.

As mentioned, the threshold adjustment directly impacts 200 employee owners; however, it will indirectly impact our entire employee population through:
- Compression in our career and wage ladder. The new threshold will narrow the bands providing less rewarding compensation opportunities.
- Limiting the growth opportunities for more challenging tasks and experiences.
- Loss of flexibility in managing the workload to meet the employee’s needs.
- Reduced investments in other types of value added compensation and benefits to offset increased salaries and more overtime pay.
- Loss of hard earned professionalism in our employees’ career development.

SEL is proud of our total compensation philosophy which ensures our employees are paid competitive, market-based salaries, have access to medical and dental benefits, have various types of paid leave and retirement benefits. We encourage L&I to allow employers to include all benefits when measuring an employee’s compensation against the salary threshold. We also ask that the agency carefully consider the impact the policy as proposed will have on an employee’s professional development and flexibility.

(Submitted on 12/17/18 by Todd Scansen, Charlie's Produce)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/17/18 by Michael Trask, Granite Falls IGA)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/17/18 by Ray Sprinkle, URM Stores)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/15/18 by Donald Rhoads, TCG Stores)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/15/18 by Matt Yorkston,Yorkston Oil)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/14/18 by Dennis Baker, Grocery Outlet)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/14/18 by Amy Spain)

My name is Amy Spain, Executive Director of a non-profit 501-C-6 organization which employs 10 people. We are a destination marketing and management organization.

If these rules were adopted, our annual budget and contract with the county would be compromised. As a small organization, we strive to keep employee hours within a 40 hour work week, but due to work and contract demands we sometimes need our administrative staff to work overtime to meet deadlines created by circumstances beyond our control.

I appreciate the opportunity to express my thoughts on the updated pre-draft rules for the Executive, Administrative and Professional exemptions from the state Minimum Wage Act, including the update of overtime exemptions and the salary threshold.

I am a hospitality industry agency which is proud to provide jobs at all levels to people in my community. The hospitality industry is an industry of opportunity that offers everything from first-time jobs to lifelong careers. I want to continue to invest in my employees and provide them with opportunities to advance their careers in hospitality or elsewhere.

I am very concerned about tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 – 2.5 times the minimum wage or a salary of $56,000 - $70,000 and adjusted annually. Adopting a salary threshold tied to any multiplier of the state minimum wage will create an issue with equality of wages between and among staff and management.

I appreciate the Department’s willingness to consider a phase in, but the two suggested approaches perpetuate the challenges created by such a drastic increase in the salary threshold. I request the Department not pick winners and losers based on geographic location or size of business. Rather, the phase in should span at least four years to give all businesses ample time to implement changes and update their business practices. Over the last three years the hospitality industry has continued to struggle with the impacts of a 40 percent increase in the minimum wage contained in I-1433. To be clear, with these new pre-draft rules the Department is suggesting a nearly 300 percent increase in wages for our employees. As an employer, this increase will likely have a negative impact on the staffing levels in my business.

I ask L&I to align any proposed changes to these exemptions with federal rules. As a business operator, we need alignment at the local, state and federal levels of government to help reduce confusion.

I am a proud member of my community and want to continue to provide jobs for employees at all levels. I ask for L&I to consider the impact of these pre-draft rules on the hospitality careers and our community and economy.

(Submitted on 12/14/18 by Dean Feldmeier, DoubleTree by Hilton Spokane City Center)

My name is Dean Feldmeier. I manage the DoubleTree by Hilton Spokane City Center. We employ 190 team members.

If the threshold for Exempt status is raised as much as is being considered we will eliminate a crucial stepping stone to allow hourly team members to work their way up to management positions.

I appreciate the opportunity to express my thoughts on the updated pre-draft rules for the Executive, Administrative and Professional exemptions from the state Minimum Wage Act, including the update of overtime exemptions and the salary threshold.

We have an excellent track record of promoting from within and giving entry level workers the opportunity to build a better life for themselves and their families.

I am very concerned about tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 – 2.5 times the minimum wage or a salary of $56,000 - $70,000 and adjusted annually. Adopting a salary threshold tied to any multiplier of the state minimum wage will create a wage gap between my employees and management and will ultimately harm jobs by eliminating middle-management positions. This is extremely demoralizing to team members who are proud to gain "exempt" status. Don't take away this important step on the professional development ladder.

I appreciate the Department’s willingness to consider a phase in, but the two suggested approaches perpetuate the challenges created by such a drastic increase in the salary threshold. I request the Department not pick winners and losers based on geographic location or size of business. Rather, the phase in should span at least four years to give all businesses ample time to implement changes and update their business practices. Over the last three years the hospitality industry has continued to struggle with the impacts of a 40 percent increase in the minimum wage contained in I-1433. To be clear, with these new pre-draft rules the Department is suggesting a nearly 300 percent increase in wages for our employees. As an employer, this increase will likely have a negative impact on the career ladder and opportunities in my business.

I ask L&I to align any proposed changes to these exemptions with federal rules. As a business operator, we need alignment at the local, state and federal levels of government to help reduce confusion.

I am a proud member of my community and want to continue to provide jobs for employees at all levels, including middle-management positions. I ask for L&I to consider the impact of these pre-draft rules on the hospitality careers and our community and economy.

(Submitted on 12/14/18 by Mike Kight, Pizza Pipeline)

My name is Mike Kight. I own/operate Pizza Pipeline and am proud to employ 150 people in 2018.

If these rules were adopted as currently proposed, I would cost 20 jobs and $420,000 to $700,000 per year. I am not sure how I would off set the cost, $25 for a small pizza.

As a business operator in our state I wanted to ensure my voice is heard in the rulemaking process for the Executive, Administrative and Professional exemptions from the Minimum Wage Act, including overtime exemptions and an update of the salary threshold. As a member of Washington’s hospitality industry, I am particularly interested in preserving my ability to provide my employees with opportunities to advance their careers.

As written, the pre-draft rules propose to tie the minimum wage to the salary threshold to a range of $56,000 - $70,000 adjusted annually or 2 – 2.5 times the state minimum wage. Adopting a salary threshold tied to any multiplier of the minimum wage would erase those mid-career management positions that are critical to climbing the hospitality career ladder. Removal of the mid-career positions and leaving all managerial positions to upper management would undercut the workforce in an already tough labor market.

I appreciate the Department’s willingness to consider a phase in, but the two suggested approaches perpetuate the challenges created by such a drastic increase in the salary threshold. I request the Department not pick winners and losers based on geographic location or size of business. Rather, the phase in should span at least four years to give all businesses ample time to implement changes and update their business practices. Over the last three years the hospitality industry has continued to struggle with the impacts of a 40 percent increase in the minimum wage contained in I-1433. To be clear, with these new pre-draft rules the Department is suggesting a nearly 300 percent increase in wages for our employees. As an employer, this increase will likely have a negative impact on the career ladder and opportunities in my business.

I am proud to serve my community and provide all levels of jobs for my employees. I ask L&I to consider the overall economic impact and harm these updated pre-draft rules could have on our state’s economy. The hospitality industry is not the only sector that may have to drastically shift because of the outcome of these rules.

Thank you for the opportunity to be engaged with this process through the submission of my comments.

Submitted on 12/14/18 by John Meier, Employer Resources Northwest)

My name is John Meier. I own/operate Employer Resources Northwest and am proud to employ 47 people in 2018.

As a business operator in our state I wanted to ensure my voice is heard in the rulemaking process for the Executive, Administrative and Professional exemptions from the Minimum Wage Act, including overtime exemptions and an update of the salary threshold. As a member of Washington’s hospitality industry, I am particularly interested in preserving my ability to provide my employees with opportunities to advance their careers.

As written, the pre-draft rules propose to tie the minimum wage to the salary threshold to a range of $56,000 - $70,000 adjusted annually or 2 – 2.5 times the state minimum wage. Adopting a salary threshold tied to any multiplier of the minimum wage would erase those mid-career management positions that are critical to climbing the hospitality career ladder. Removal of the mid-career positions and leaving all managerial positions to upper management would undercut the workforce in an already tough labor market.

I appreciate the Department’s willingness to consider a phase in, but the two suggested approaches perpetuate the challenges created by such a drastic increase in the salary threshold. I request the Department not pick winners and losers based on geographic location or size of business. Rather, the phase in should span at least four years to give all businesses ample time to implement changes and update their business practices. Over the last three years the hospitality industry has continued to struggle with the impacts of a 40 percent increase in the minimum wage contained in I-1433. To be clear, with these new pre-draft rules the Department is suggesting a nearly 300 percent increase in wages for our employees. As an employer, this increase will likely have a negative impact on the career ladder and opportunities in my business.

I am proud to serve my community and provide all levels of jobs for my employees. I ask L&I to consider the overall economic impact and harm these updated pre-draft rules could have on our state’s economy. The hospitality industry is not the only sector that may have to drastically shift because of the outcome of these rules.

Thank you for the opportunity to be engaged with this process through the submission of my comments.

(Submitted on 12/13/18 by Joanna Cullen, The League of Women Voters of WA)

The League of Women Voters of WA would be required to pay staff by the hour and overtime as neither reaches the proposed threshold. Only one of our staff would likely be impacted. Since in recent time we were paying by the hour with overtime and only have occasional need for overtime, I doubt that we would be much impacted. Perhaps we might be motivated to assign more work to the part-time employee in order to avoid overtime. My treasurer job is somewhat easier with salaried person. Except for ensuring that we are aware of any changes to the law so that we are in compliance, there seems to be little reason for concern. The main impact would be to ensure that we pay overtime as required. Our work would continue and not be impaired by the change to the law.

(Submitted on 12/13/18 by Jeff Iverson, RAM Restaurant Group)

We (the Ram Restaurant Group) strongly object to the proposed increase in the salary threshold in connection with revisions to the white collar exceptions of the Minimum Wage Act. We understand that the current proposals would increase the salary threshold to $56,000 per year at the lower end to as much as $76,000 per year.

Increasing salaries to the minimum threshold is simply not realistic in this challenging environment in the hospitality industry, particularly the casual dining segment in which the Ram competes. The increase in the salary threshold would force us and other similarly situated employers to either eliminate some of the management positions currently paid less than the salary threshold or convert the compensation for those positions to an hourly rate. Neither option is desirable. The first option of reducing management positions necessarily means that entry level positions would be eliminated, which in our business is the assistant manager position. The fact that there would be fewer entry level management positions speaks to the fact that there would be fewer opportunities in our organization and others for living wage jobs. It also raises the possibility that there would be a shortage of skilled hospitality leaders in the future. The fact that there would be fewer entry level management positions also raises the real possibility that our more highly compensated, experienced managers would be forced to work longer hours, which in turn could cause those managers to re-exam the work - life balance (which is already a serious concern in our industry) and perhaps force them to seek employment outside the industry.

The second option - converting formerly salaried positions to an hourly positions - is also problematic. Inherent in the process are legal issues concerning the FLSA and the classification (or mis-classification) of employees in exempt positions. The more practical and immediate concern is the desirability and, in some instances, the ability of employees to work a position that pays by the hour. Our experience is that management employees appreciate the fact that they receive a predicable income in the form of a salary. It affords them some level of prestige. Being paid a salary also affords them the ability to budget their spending and therefore enhances their ability to make important financial decisions in their personnel lives. By its very nature, being paid by the hour creates uncertainty in a budget and therefore decreases the opportunity (or ability) to, for example, buy a home or car or to plan for a family, etc.

We understand and appreciate the desirability of increasing the salary threshold. However, we believe that as a practical matter the business community will not respond by simply increasing salaries to meet the new threshold – it is not that simple. We strongly encourage Labor and Industries to take into account the real world implications of increasing the threshold and let the market dictate compensation for labor.

We appreciate this opportunity to provide input into the matter.

(Submitted on 12/13/18 by Don Stolz)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/12/12/18 by Howie Bargreen)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/12/18 by Nolan Lockwood, Harvest-Foods)

Keep in mind what the average income is for areas outside of King and surrounding counties. If you take a hard look at who voted for increasing the minimum wage several years ago ( on avg, but you can do the research) 4 counties voted for and 20 some voted against. Because of the increase we have reduced the number of our employees over the last several years, prices have increased to consumers, service has dropped, employee benefits were reduced and production has declined. Just think what will happen if you make these changes to the leadership of small businesses.

We are already planning for January 1 with discontinuing service with a laundry vendor, cutting current jobs, closing down our Post Office Annex, increased the qualification needed for company health insurance, quit home delivery for shut-ins, reduced hours of operations which reduced employees hours, and will be reviewing current work schedules which effects service and we are considering self-checkouts.

If this goes through, because you haven't defined how many hours a salaried person can work they can start working 80 hours a week like I had to do in the 70's which got me where I am today.

If our people don't like their current wages or working conditions they can seek other employment, go back to school and learn a new trade, expand their current skills. or become a better asset to the company. Since they haven't they just might be happy, enjoying the flexibility, status, and other benefits of management.

You certainly know how to make small, independently owned business fail and kill the incentive to be an entrepreneur

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.

(Submitted on 12/12/18 by Phil Blackburn, Philbee Foods)

I operate a business in Washington state, specifically within the grocery, food and beverage industry. It is increasingly challenging to navigate labor laws that differ significantly federally, at the state level, and locally. A significant amount of our time is spent comparing and complying with numerous requirements on the same issue, just at different levels of government. This causes confusion for employers and employees, duplication issues, and a need for administrative policies that explain the difference between the federal, state and local rules.

I am proud to be able to invest in my employees, see them gain valuable skills and transfer them into leadership opportunities as they advance their careers. I am concerned that tying the salary overtime threshold to a range of 2 - 2.5 times the minimum wage will discourage my ability to provide more upward career growth opportunities. Adopting any multiplier of the minimum wage would create a wage gap between my employees and management. While the salary level needs to be adjusted, the proposed increase with no geographic considerations, automatic adjustments and only partial consideration of incentive pay will have a significant negative impact on the supermarket and convenience industry - a place where many associates receive their first management positions and no longer have to punch a time clock. In addition to a potential reduction in hours, workers that are reclassified as non-exempt employees will lose additional benefits; such as flexible scheduling, predictable take-home pay, and an increased opportunity to climb the ladder.

Our state law on salary overtime threshold is outdated and irrelevant because the federal requirement is higher. I agree that it needs to be updated, but the U.S. Department is Labor is already going through a process to update the federal law. The WA State Department of Labor and Industries should wait until the federal rulemaking process is finished, then align their rules with the federal rules. If the Department of Labor and Industries waits until the Department of Labor is finished, then Washington State will only need to go through the rulemaking process once instead of multiple times in order to meet the federal standard. This will save time and money for all parties involved in creating new state rules for the EAP exemptions.

I urge the department to pause rulemaking until the new federal standard is adopted, and then align our rules with the federal requirements.

Thank you for your time.