How Much Do You Owe On The Job?
There are certain jobs and areas where they assume that employees will work way beyond the 40-hour week. Should they?
It has increasingly become clear to me that part of being a good employer is being cognizant that employees have lives outside work. They have spouses, children, aging parents, and sometimes they have to go to the dentist so their teeth won't fall out or cause them to have screaming fits when they're on the phone.
If an employee is worth having, if they work hard and smart and are valuable, maybe the employer should cut them a little slack on, say, having life and being a person sometimes cut into their work.
I'm not talking about some crap employee who's lazy and phones it in. They should be warned and then warned again and again and then weeded out.
But say an office's clerk is 10 minutes late. Here in LA, traffic is a thing, and you can end up being an hour late because some mofo was texting on the 10 Freeway and caused a pileup.
So if that clerk is 10 minutes late from time to time, but if he or she also is just a golden employee who will stay late and do all sorts of stuff above and beyond, well, maybe you forget those 10 minutes. Drop them from memory. (Work at it if you're a hierarchical control freak.)
The above rant was inspired by a story I saw about a cryptographer fired after four hours of work because he couldn't work more than 40 hours while caring for his dying wife. Kevin Cullen writes at the BoGlo:
Don Davis is a cryptographer from Somerville. For 30 years he has worked in cyber security, and two years ago he landed a job with the Boston-based subsidiary of BAE Systems, a British company that is one of the world's biggest defense contractors.At the time, his wife, Elisabeth Traumann, was dying from a rare form of stomach cancer.
On his first day on the job, Davis met with his supervisor, Chris Bryant, at the company's downtown office, and explained his family's situation. Davis told Bryant that his wife had only weeks to live, that he had two kids at home, and that while he had arranged for his wife to have caregivers during the work day, he was the primary caregiver at all other times.
Davis said he could work his normal 40-hour week, but that, for whatever time his wife had left, he had to be at home at nights and weekends to take care of her. The doctors estimated she'd live anywhere from two weeks to two months.
Davis says Bryant responded the way you would hope any decent human being would: "I can't imagine what you're going through. We'll work with you on this."
But sympathy was not on offer when Davis explained his situation to the woman who ran the company's human resources department.
"All she did was rant at me," Davis told me.
In their 15-minute meeting, Davis said, the woman didn't entertain temporary alternative arrangements, such as working from home if needed. She simply insisted he needed to be available at the office 24/7.
Later, Davis was summoned to a meeting with Bryant, the woman from human resources and the company's senior vice president, where Davis was informed his job offer was being rescinded.
Heartless much?
Also stupid.
When I was first getting together with my literary agent, she presented me with a big caveat: She was pregnant and would be taking six months leave. I got how utterly awesome she is, thanked her for being honest, and said I'd wait. (I used the time to polish the fuck out of my proposal, which sold my book, "Good Manners for Nice People Who Sometimes Say F*ck."
Sounds like a Family Medical Leave Act violation.
wfjag at November 9, 2019 4:47 AM
It has been my experience that HR was where they put people that didn’t really have any useful skills that the company needed, but were people that they had to hire to make their diversity numbers look good.
This has led to a mentality where the bean counters are driving the train at the expense, to a large extent of the actual mission/work product .
My husband supervises engineers and contractors on large maintenance and construction projects. The jobs require a lot of flexibility because work is often performed outside of regular daytime office hours.
One of the women bean counter HR types got very upset that time cards were not accounting for the casual time off during the day that he gave his employees because of them working half the night on the runway or other projects that could only be worked during mission down time.
It actually led to a confrontation with her since overtime was not funded and could not be paid, so comp time was the only way to make up for the extra hours.
My husband is a very mild mannered person, but went to bat for his people. She had a melt down when he confronted her.
I can see the possibility of the poor guy in your story here, running up against another such “rules nazi” in HR.
Isab at November 9, 2019 5:02 AM
Sounds like a Family Medical Leave Act violation.
wfjag at November 9, 2019 4:47 AM
Yes, except he hadn’t actually” been hired” yet.
Isab at November 9, 2019 5:04 AM
In the mid '90s, I had an encounter with an HR type at an HR-mandated class on body language, expressions, and diversity in the workplace.
In this class, we were told by Marian the Librarian not to use sports-oriented metaphors like "the whole nine yards." When I protested that it was not a sports metaphor, that in no sport in the world is 9 yards a consequential standard measurement, I was told adamantly that it was a male-oriented sports metaphor and should not be used in the workplace because it leaves women feeling excluded. Um, yeah.
The whole section on body language was slanted toward female body language being the standard and showing normal male body language (folded arms, leaning back, etc.) as dismissive and wrong.
After that, whenever I have to attend these seminars, I just shut up, nod, and lament the wasted time I'll never get back.
Luckily, most of them are online now, where I can gasp, sigh, roll my eyes, and laugh without HR being the wiser.
OT: "The Whole Nine Yards" did not enter the lexicon as a phrase until the late '60s. Its origins are shrouded in mystery to this day.
Conan the Grammarian at November 9, 2019 5:21 AM
Hadn't he?
Exhibit A: "On his first day on the job....
Exhibit B: "...Davis met with his supervisor....",
So, he had a job and a supervisor.
Conan the Grammarian at November 9, 2019 5:24 AM
Yes, except he hadn’t actually” been hired” yet. ~ Isab at November 9, 2019 5:04 AM
Hadn't he?
Exhibit A: "On his first day on the job....
Exhibit B: "...Davis met with his supervisor....",
So, he had a job and a supervisor.
Conan the Grammarian at November 9, 2019 5:24 AM
Yea. So this first day thing is pretty meaningless for a government contractor crypto job. The HR people have to put him into the system and on the payroll. You don’t get to that part, you haven’t actually been hired.
The test is going to be, did he ever receive a paycheck? If not, he never actually worked for them.
Isab at November 9, 2019 5:44 AM
I'm going to ignore the specific case here.
"There are certain jobs and areas where they assume that employees will work way beyond the 40-hour week. Should they?"
Yes they should. Some jobs require more than 40-hrs. It is unavoidable. But the employee should be informed of that. If you stealth spring it on them don't be surprised when they look for employment elsewhere.
To give a specific example, offshore rig work. You are on a boat for 9 months. You are in the middle of nowhere. You can't pop off to the store or theater. You are stuck on a boat with the same four guys month after month. The job is essentially 24/7 for those 9 months. The employees are aware of this before they start and are compensated appropriately. (i.e. what it takes to get people to accept the job) There really isn't a way to make this a standard 8-5 job. If employers could they would do so in a heartbeat and cut pay just as fast.
The solution to bad workplaces isn't government regulations. The government should require safe workplaces but that is the limit. Anything more should be between the employee and the employer. The real solution is having options. Employees aren't the only ones suffering from supply and demand. Employers are too. If you can't find enough workers then you need to change to solve that problem. Better pay, better work hours, benefits, whatever. And the same on the other side of the table. Can't find a job, learn new skills, find new contacts, move, or even make the job, found the business.
Ben at November 9, 2019 6:00 AM
As for this specific case, sad but not unexpected. It was his first day at the job and he notified his employer he had an issue that was pretty much guaranteed to negatively impact his work. A position like that it normally takes six months or more for the employee to become profitable for the company. It shouldn't be surprising they chose to go with someone else.
Tragic, but sometimes that is just how life is.
Ben at November 9, 2019 6:07 AM
Well said Ben, I agree completely.
Apply a 40 hour structured work rule to emergency rooms, and hospitals, and see how fast the place goes bankrupt or descends into chaos.
The 40 hour work week is a 20th century invention of Union activists designed to keep factory workers from being exploited.
Anyone who has ever been in the military learns that isn’t the way the real world works.
Wanna set your own hours? Be your own boss.
Isab at November 9, 2019 6:14 AM
They'll have to give him the check for the day he showed up
NicoleK at November 9, 2019 7:20 AM
They'll have to give him the check for the day he showed up
NicoleK at November 9, 2019 7:20 AM
Labor law expert now?
We don’t even know from the facts given that he was an *employee.*. Might have been a contractor.
Isab at November 9, 2019 7:48 AM
“Later, Davis was summoned to a meeting with Bryant, the woman from human resources and the company's senior vice president, where Davis was informed his job offer was being rescinded”
Pretty clearly, not an employee.
Isab at November 9, 2019 7:57 AM
"The 40 hour work week is a 20th century invention of Union activists designed to keep factory workers from being exploited."
And rightfully so.
"Anyone who has ever been in the military learns that isn’t the way the real world works."
Sometimes it is how the real world works.
"Wanna set your own hours? Be your own boss. "
True, well mostly.
Matthew at November 9, 2019 8:42 AM
"There are certain jobs and areas where they assume that employees will work way beyond the 40-hour week. Should they?"
Heh. {laughing in US Navy}
You've inadvertently exposed the entire problem with people who legislate having never served, or sworn to a duty that required things not measurable by a paycheck. Many have never had to make payroll.
Most, if not all, are oblivious to the effects their legislation has on INCREASING illegal immigration and under-the-table employment.
It may escape you that the job, not the employer, sets the work schedule, and that the employer is easily able to determine how many people she must have on shift. Some jobs don't even allow for a relief worker.
Radwaste at November 9, 2019 10:15 AM
After that, whenever I have to attend these seminars, I just shut up, nod, and lament the wasted time I'll never get back.
Yes, but you got paid the same. Unless your soul escaped out of your ears and is wandering the world?
Luckily, most of them are online now, where I can gasp, sigh, roll my eyes, and laugh without HR being the wiser.
Wait till the insist on putting a webcam in your cubicle.
I R A Darth Aggie at November 9, 2019 10:16 AM
I'm a salaried employee. So I'm not eligible for comp time, overtime or any other time should I work for more than 40 hours. And as Radwaste notes, sometimes the job insists on more than 40 hours.
Should I say "the server is down, but I've reached the end of my work week, so it'll have to wait until Monday at 8am"? as a matter of personal pride, I'll stay on it until it's functional enough to use, or until I'm too tired to think straight and which case I must stop else risk turning a tough situation into a 5 alarm fire. But once I've recovered enough sleep, I'll be back at it.
I R A Darth Aggie at November 9, 2019 10:24 AM
All of what you say is true, Amy, but when gov gets involved in mandating working conditions, it does not go well. There are workers who prefer odd hours, or being on call. gov mandates such as the calif law re Uber ruin things for them. In college I worked for a street crew for the city. We were mandated to stop work at 5pm exactly, so we would be digging a hole and almost had it done but it was getting close to 5 so we would shovel the dirt back in and put barricades up because we could not work past 5. Idiotic.
Inhuman working hours and mean bosses are self-correcting problems, because people quit and go work for a more reasonable company. The crazy town company eventually folds because they can't keep employees (esp with low unemployment like today). The idea that people are trapped in a job is naive and stupid.
cc at November 9, 2019 2:05 PM
In their 15-minute meeting, Davis said, the woman didn't entertain temporary alternative arrangements, such as working from home if needed. She simply insisted he needed to be available at the office 24/7.
His first day on the job and the first thing he does is insist on special accommodations? Maybe he should have brought that up during the job interviews. The HR lady said he needed to be available at the office 24/7 ? Nah, I'm not buying that. Davis isn't telling the whole story.
Are we to believe that the company's needs and expectations, and Davis's ability and willingness to meet them, never came up during the interviews and hiring process? Would HR Lady have hired him if he'd told her that he absolutely could not work more than 40 scheduled hours a week, or if he had not told her that he was definitely able and willing to fulfill the requirements of the position? It sounds like he never even mentioned his personal requirements until after he was hired and reported for work on his first day. I don't know anything about cryptographers, but I get the idea that it was a position of responsibility requiring a lot of skill and experience. Who did he think was going to pick up his slack after he headed for home at 4:00 every afternoon?
"All she did was rant at me," Davis said. Well golly! She might have been feeling pretty deceived about then. She has to start the expensive and time consuming talent search and hiring process all over again while other people work even longer hours doing the work Davis was hired to do. HR Lady probably has some 'splainin' to do to her own boss.
Maybe Davis applied for the position at BAE Systems because they have primo medical insurance, and told HR Lady whatever she wanted to hear, true or not, knowing that searching for and hiring skilled people is time consuming and expensive, and thinking that once he had his foot in the door they would be forced to accommodate him to avoid starting all over again.
Ken R at November 9, 2019 2:25 PM
Just to clear up confusion here a bit.
FMLA protections can only be used if you have worked at a particular place for 1,250 hours during the 12 months prior to the start of leave.
The point being that if you show up for a new job you aren't immediately eligible for FMLA.
Artemis at November 9, 2019 4:28 PM
Isab Says:
"Pretty clearly, not an employee."
I love the way you went out of your way to try and insult NicoleK for not being an expert in labor law when you don't seem to really grasp how FMLA works either.
Even *IF* this guy has been working there through an entire pay period it would not matter.
Generally speaking you need to work for an employer for many months before you are eligible for FMLA.
I suppose you aren't an expert in labor law either.
Artemis at November 9, 2019 4:36 PM
According to the article, "Don Davis had been in the office all of four hours."
While I'd argue that he had, in fact, been hired since he was in the office and discussing his job duties, I'm guessing, BAE nonetheless acted within the time frame in which it could "rescind" the offer of employment without penalty.
Well, if Isab's right and he was not yet legally an employee, then it sounds like it's not a violation.
From the article, it also sounds like he was hoping to use the BAE benefits for his wife and his chronically-ill daughter. So, it's possible that he withheld the pertinent information about his wife's condition and the demands that condition placed on his availability from the interviewers.
Conan the Grammarian at November 9, 2019 5:48 PM
Contact law is my speciality. In the course of that, there has some intersection with labor law.
I do know a bit about BAE and what kind of work they do that involves cryptography. I have friends who have worked for them. None of my friends who worked for BAE were actually *employees* of BAE except in the administrative sense. They were contractors hired by BAE which performed all the administrative duties such as benefits leave and pay functions but the work performed was actually for the U.S government ( and supervised by them). This is why I doubt that he ever accrued any employee protections, with his four hours in the office.
Wanting to do highly classified work like cryptography from home. Guess that went over like a lead balloon with DOD.
Isab at November 9, 2019 7:06 PM
"From the article, it also sounds like he was hoping to use the BAE benefits for his wife and his chronically-ill daughter. So, it's possible that he withheld the pertinent information about his wife's condition and the demands that condition placed on his availability from the interviewers." - Conan
This is probably the likely scenario. The supervisor he spoke to may not have been the person who hired him.
But here's a key part from the article:
“I can’t get even with them financially. The company’s worth about $22 billion,” he said. “There’s no jury award that would make a dent in them. The only revenge I can get is to expose this. It was pretty pitiless.”
BAE is not the kind of corporation that does business with the general public. Exposing this will not hurt them in the slightest.
Fayd at November 9, 2019 10:03 PM
A bit of story time. I've got a customer with an engineer who got cancer about a year ago. The company is looking to put a retirement package together for him so he can quietly retire and they don't have to deal with him anymore. Sounds heartless at first but the reality is anything but that. The truth is he's never been a good employee. He is lazy and doesn't get much work done. But the company is in Pampa, TX. I.e. the middle of nowhere. There are something like three electrical engineers in the county. So he has no real competition. The company kept him on because getting some work done was better than no work. Well, now that he is sick they are paying but getting no work out of him.
The sick fellow could spin a sob story just like the one above and only hearing his side of the story it would be very convincing. When you hear both sides you realize everyone is working in their own best interests and sometimes life is just sad.
Ben at November 10, 2019 6:11 AM
"the whole nine yards."
I had understood this to be the length of a ammunition belt for a particular machine gun. If you give someone the "whole nine yards" you have given them everything and you have given it to them good and proper.
Ken McE at November 10, 2019 8:39 AM
Nope.
I had heard that, too, but in investigating the etymology of the phrase, it turns out not to be the case. No known Allied aircraft in World War II used a 27-foot ammunition belt.
Besides, the phrase was not found in a publications until the '60s, in a novel, much too late for a phrase originating in World War II to become common usage.
Some arguments were advanced for a Vietnam War military origin but, again, no logical military origin could be found.
Conan the Grammarian at November 10, 2019 9:09 AM
Just a reminder, with regard to teachers:
They do NOT have a mere "six-hour day" or get summers off, typically. It's not that hard to guess why. Even when they don't have a different paying job as well. (If they do, you can bet they're working over 40 hours per week on average, including all the unpaid work they do for their school.)
lenona at November 10, 2019 11:20 AM
Leave a comment