For much of the past year I and many of us, likely all of us, in the non-profit sector have had FLSA looming over us. Emails, webinars, conference break out sessions, no matter where we were or what we were doing, it seemed a conversation about FLSA was right around the corner.
The amount of time and effort spent on something that was happening in the future seemed silly at times. I, as a non-profit executive, listened and even participated in a few of these conversations, but in the end it seemed a little fake to me. Sometimes I wonder if we are just looking for things to be stressed out about.
I run a Boys & Girls Club with two locations and we have a Resale Shop. We have about 20 employees. We RARELY ask anyone to put in over time. What I believe, and what I tell my leadership team, is that overtime is always the result of poor planning or an emergency. I believe asking employees to work more than 40 hours a week does one of two things, and sometimes it does both of these things, it creates unhappy employees and it blows up your payroll.
Now, perhaps the world disagrees. Perhaps the non-profit world has employees working MORE than 40 hours a week and is paying them wages where this rule would come in to play more often than I think. But if so, why? Do we really need this rule?
U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant III, a, federal judge in Texas, granted a preliminary injunction stopping the changes of the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). These changes, which were to take effect on December 1, would require paying overtime to most workers making less than $47,476 a year, roughly double the current wage threshold. Why not just have them NOT work overtime? What am I missing? Is this truly an issue? If it were, wouldn’t our turnover be thru-the-roof?
At my organization we are expanding our hours of operation at our Resale Shop, to bring in more revenue so that we can serve more youth and with greater impact! We do this, of course, knowing that more hours, more payroll, will be needed. Should we have the current team members work those hours taking them from current levels to over 40 hours per week? No, we shouldn’t. Should we hire new team members to some of these new hours. YES! Is this NOT what we all do? Perhaps I am missing something, but to me I honestly do not need a law to tell me that working employees more than 40 hours at a low end wage is likely not the best ROI.
The rule is dumb, in my never so humble opinion. I am glad the judge did what he did, and I expect it to not become law ever, but if I am wrong I am quite sure that it will have a grand total of zero effect on my organization.
Am I alone? I would love your thoughts.
You can also follow my adventures in blogging on my personal sites www.inspireandenable.org for nonprofit news and at dolewhipdad.weebly.com for Disney silliness