THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display

[Page: S4183]  GPO's PDF
---

   Mr. GREGG. I join the senior Senator from Alaska, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, in his excellent statement congratulating our

[Page: S4184]  GPO's PDF

   His knowledge of this is unique and special, and we turn to him in the Senate about military affairs. I join in the acknowledgment of what the men and women of our services have done in this area. I thank the Senator for bringing it to our attention.

   I rise briefly, however, to address the new regulations proposed relative to white-collar overtime issues presented by the Department of Labor. We, as a Senate, have for literally months been hearing from the other side of the aisle that they wanted to stop the procedure of regulatory activity in this area; they wanted to foreshorten the proper and appropriate approach to governance; that is, to issue proposed regulations and take information and comment on the regulations and bring forward any sort of clarification of the law in the area of overtime activity, of which the law has been on the books for 50 years.

   Unfortunately, it has become confused and arcane in many ways. In fact, the law as presently structured was put together in a time when this country had people who were called straw bosses, leg men, and keypunch operators, things which no longer are relevant. Yet the law still has these categories of individuals and their rating systems are affecting how overtime is paid.

   It has become a fertile ground, regrettably, because of this confusion. Because it is a law that has not been adequately reformed and kept up to date, it is a fertile ground for lawsuits.

   The United States Bar Weekly, a lawyers' weekly USA newspaper headline, summed up the salaries in the workplace across America by saying in a headline: ``Boom In Overtime Suits, A Danger For Employers But A `Gold Mine' For Plaintiffs' Lawyers.''

   Unfortunately, that is all we have gotten from the regulation in the last 2 years--lawsuits. We do not have a more efficient marketplace, or people who deserve overtime getting overtime. We have not had a settled issue as to who has a right to overtime.

   Secretary Chao said we should do something about this proposal. Secretary Chao stepped forward and said this is an issue, a problem, we need to do something about. She put forth proposed regulations which I, as chairman of the committee that has jurisdiction, said there are some issues. We have questions. Let's look at them. That is why those proposed regulations received 80,000 comments. The Department has been reviewing those.

   Again and again people have come to the Senate from the other side of the aisle and used the excuse of trying to foreshorten and stop and undermine the process of regulatory reform and the comment period as a means to try to stop

   other legislation. How many pieces of legislation have been held up interminably, and some simply not passed, because the other side of the aisle says we cannot have the proposed regulations out there; we have to stay with the law as it is.

   Now it has shown the folks were absolutely wrong. The folks came to the Senate and tried to use this proposed regulation as a stalking-horse to obstruct other legislation on the floor. It was a stalking-horse because the Department of Labor has come forward now with a new set of regulations which have grown out of and evolved out of the work that was done as a result of reviewing and listening to the input from the 80,000 comments.

   The final set of regulations has some extremely good proposals. It guarantees 6.7 million Americans who today are not guaranteed overtime will receive overtime. People up to $23,000 of income will receive overtime. That is up from the present threshold today of $8,000. That means 6.7 million people who today are in a gray area are no longer in a gray area and they will get overtime.

   In addition, it makes unalterably clear this overtime regulation applies to white-collar areas. That was never an area for concern. People were concerned. The Department has made it clear the overtime of groups such as first responders, nurses, veterans coming back from serving overseas, licensed practical nurses, and registered nurses would be protected.

   That was never the intent of the original regulations, I don't think. But clearly, it is definitively addressed in this final rule.

   Furthermore, the people whose overtime may be at risk have to have an earning that exceeds $100,000, and they have to be in a white-collar activity, not a blue collar. If a blue-collar person happens to make more than $100,000, their overtime stays in place. The overtime of a white-collar person making more than $100,000 may be impacted by this. The Department estimates that is less than 120,000 people who may be impacted by that part of the regulation.

   In this final regulation, 6.7 million in the gray area will get overtime who are not getting it. They may be getting it, but they do not know they have a right. And people who are concerned about overtime, working blue-collar jobs, or working in areas such as law enforcement and firefighting or nursing, will absolutely be assured of their overtime rights, although they probably were.

   It means the business community, especially small businesses, will have a clear understanding of who has the right to overtime and who does not have a right to overtime--not clear, but a clearer understanding of who does and does not have a right to overtime. That means instead of ending up with small businesses especially having to spend a lot of money defending lawsuits which are arbitrary in many cases and which are class action in other cases, they will be able to spend their money on creating new jobs.

   Instead of having a litigious atmosphere out there, we will have an atmosphere where people can understand what their responsibilities are to pay people. Those people who are receiving this overtime will benefit significantly from this clarity, and other folks who will be getting jobs as a result of businesses having money to invest, rather than having to pay lawyers to defend these lawsuits. It is a step in the right direction.

   I believe that opposition today, should it still continue, can only be defined as political. We know that opposition, in light of these regulations coming out in final form, was probably highly political before, but clearly in light of the definitiveness and the constructiveness of the changes which have come forward with the final regulations, any additional opposition is partisan, political, and driven by an election year attitude, or it is simply a desire to be a stalking-horse to promote lawsuits versus promoting efficient use of resources in our society, especially by small businesses.

   I congratulate the Department of Labor for doing the job which they are paid to do, which is to try to make our laws more understandable and constructive. As a result, they have made a very strong step forward to assisting people in getting overtime who may not be getting it today.

   I yield the floor.

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display