jt04
Well-Known Member
I am just hoping for a WDWMagic lanyard.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Spirited News & Observations II -- NGE/Baxter
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
I am just hoping for a WDWMagic lanyard.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Wow. That's the type of thing that could get an exec fired in many companies. And he put all that in writing?!
I just want permission to get the WDWMagic logo tattooed on my forehead.
I'm living proof you don't need permission. It bothers the wife though. *sigh*
englanddg
One Little Spark...
Completely agreed. I saw nothing wrong with the memo.
Before reading the memo, I thought he was actively encouraging employees to misreport their time. I didn't see that anywhere in the memo. He simply asked, work the hours you were scheduled...don't try to squeak out a late clock out time which would force us to pay unbudgeted OT to you.
The "donate a few extra hours", I suspect, means that 7 is the end of their normal work day without accounting for OT, and he's implying that the company would appreciate and recognize those who felt they couldn't contribute after 7p, if they simply didn't take the OT.
Anyhow, it could have been worded better, but I see nothing wrong with the memo. Certainly nothing illegal or abusive towards employees (except maybe implying that many of them steal from work even though they are paid a per-diem...which says something about the employees and their professionalism, not the manager / exec)
GSP Guy
Well-Known Member
LOL... on a side note if you came to me with a reference to having worked for the president then you would automatically be deemed as inadequate and underqualified! Sorry,couldn't resist even as true as it is!
Mr Bill
Well-Known Member
After looking over it again, I'm not sure. Asking hourly folks to "take the 9:00 out" if it's 9:10 seems like a pretty obvious case of 10 unpaid minutes of work to me. He seems to be continuing the same scenario of "if it's 9:10" when he suggests maybe taking a 7:00 out. If this is the case, the idea of a media empire like ESPN asking their employees to volunteer their time without pay is simply ridiculous IMO.
I will agree that "don't steal all the bottled water" is a reasonable request however.
DocMcHulk
Well-Known Member
We'll need to meet up and compare, i think mine will give yours a real challenge.
Tom
Beta Return
Oh, this is getting hot.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
First of all...O/T, as looked at by the DOL, is time over 40 hours per week not 8 hour days and I'd be willing to bet that this doesn't apply to foreign countries with different work ethics. Secondly, I read that what he was asking is that they not round UP on the hours, if they do anything round it DOWN. If they are done work at 9:10 clocking out at 9:30 would be asking for 20 minutes more pay then actually worked, causing problems for the OT account. I didn't see where he was demanding that anyone "donate" time, just kinda asking if they might consider it. Most will not unless they are in fear of losing their jobs. It is a hard thing to prove in court because if the total amount of compensation, no matter how many hours are put in, is over minimum wage per hour they don't usually show much in the line of sympathy toward the employee. I'd guess that most of these people are paid well over minimum.
And DOL does not institute legal action unless the offense is HUGE. They tell the people affected that they might have a case to receive compensation for their time, but they have to actually take the action of hiring lawyers to do so. The key factor here, especially in this memo is that he asked for volunteers, he didn't demand that they volunteer their time. There is a big difference there.
Taking water, especially in a place like Brazil, where almost all water consumed by visitors is bottled, is an expensive proposition and really is petty theft. They are getting paid, they can buy their own water. They would if they were home.
And DOL does not institute legal action unless the offense is HUGE. They tell the people affected that they might have a case to receive compensation for their time, but they have to actually take the action of hiring lawyers to do so. The key factor here, especially in this memo is that he asked for volunteers, he didn't demand that they volunteer their time. There is a big difference there.
Taking water, especially in a place like Brazil, where almost all water consumed by visitors is bottled, is an expensive proposition and really is petty theft. They are getting paid, they can buy their own water. They would if they were home.
Clever Name
Well-Known Member
luv
Well-Known Member
Many places still use the 15 minute mark. Punch out before 9:15, it is a 9:00 out. Punch out after 9:15, it is 9:30. Entirely reasonable to ask people not to milk the clock.
Asking people to work off the clock ("donating time") is murky at best and illegal at worst. I don't work for Wage & Labor, but I'm sure they would know.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
I believe in some states overtime can also be hit on a per day basis.
Yup where I work anything over 8 hrs is O.T
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Possible, I guess, but that would be state rules and not federal. Unless, it changed recently...federal labor rules state 40 hour week. But, anything is possible. I would guess that if they had any jurisdiction concerning money earned out of country, they would lean toward the customs of the country and, at best, federal guidelines. I know that many times the 8 hour day was more a result of union negotiation than established law.
Yea I'm union....one of the very few things a union is good for.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Hmmm....it was meant as a lighthearted diversion (about Goof or ASJHLJSJJASHLA being the account of Bob Iger). However, upon re-reading, I may have sounded a bit agressive and personal. My apologies then!
Where did this come from?
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
I'm afraid you miss my point. Let me try to rephrase it, with examples:
The issue is that JFB is not a NYT writer. So the above doesn't apply in the first place.
Indeed. She was not. Ever.
Hence...she wasn't any of the things above. None of it applies.
Apparantly she wasn't concurrently working in PR for TWDC and writing for the Times. That she wasn't is the very issue at hand. However, if she wasn't, then logically there is no issue of her working for both at the same time - because she wasn't working for the NYT to begin with!
There is simply a faulty logic at work. Independent of one's opinion of Blondie and her resumé. Namely, that one can not accuse her both of having worked for the NYT, and of her not having worked for the NYT. It is one or the other.
If she did work for the NYT, there is no resumé misrepresentation. If she didn't, then there is no issue with NYT writers guidelines or of conflicting interests with TWDC.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Incidentally, here you are doing a major Blondie yourself.
To say that Blondie 'works in PR for TWDC' is exactly the same as what Blondie does! Namely, namedropping the large corporation for dramatic impact. Blondie works for social media, of Parks and Resorts. To say that she 'works in PR for TWDC' is like saying that, well, that she 'worked as a local correspondent for the NYTC'.
Moreover, to then speak of her as 'writing for the Times' is not merely doing the exact same thing as Blondie does, but is even using the very same phrasing as her. Is doing exactly that against which you rally so hard: presenting her as a Times correspondent.